UWN is testing Prolog systems that don't exist anymore:

Jekejeke 1.5.0 https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/ulrich/iso-prolog/variable_names#73

a) There is no more publicitly available Jekejeke
Prolog anymore, I think I wrote UWN already in the
past about that.

b) There is only Dogelog Player, which has a 100%
Prolog written read/write predicates including
the variable_name/1 option. Source code is here,
you also find GIT access etc to the Prolog system:

Quelltexte und Archive des Dogelog Spieler. https://www.xlog.ch/izytab/doclet/docs/07_spec/02_dogelog.html

c) There is an internal version of Jekejeke Prolog,
which is way after 1.5.0, with version 1.7.0, but
it also uses the Dogelog Payer 100% Prolog
written read/write, so no need to test.


Mild Shock schrieb:

Guess how many newer Prolog systems allow this here:

?- [user].
p;q --> r.
   true.

On the other hand SWI-Prolog disallows it:

?- [user].
p;q --> r.

ERROR: user://1:29:
ERROR:    No permission to define dcg_nonterminal `p;q'

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

I recently introduce '$VAR'/1 detection in
writing again. I have now a 100% Prolog written
'$VAR'/1 capable output routine.

Somehow I found '$VAR'/1 usueful again, especially
in connection with numbersvars/3 which is in
library(compat) the two make a nice pair

of Swiss army knife for printing. What the
routines don't do, they for example don't check
variable_names/1 option for a cyclic list, so

I currently get:

/* Dogelog Player */
?- VN = ['U'=X,'V'=Y | VN], write_term(f(X,g(Y,X),Y),
[variable_names(VN)]), nl.
%%% hangs or I wasn't wainting long enough

But then SWI-Prolog does something strange,
but the error message is funny:

?- VN = ['U'=X,'V'=Y | VN], write_term(f(X,g(Y,X),Y),
[variable_names(VN)]), nl.
ERROR: Type error: `list' expected, found `'V'=V' (a compound)

Does the error message use the variable_names/1
association list that is in prepaperation somehow,
as a unintended side effect? Or what explains that

it shows 'V'=V' and not 'V'=Y'? And why does it
complain about compound? And not say something about cyclic?
This here works correctly:

?- VN = ['U'=X,'V'=Y], write_term(f(X,g(Y,X),Y),
[variable_names(VN)]), nl.
f(U,g(V,U),V)

Mild Shock schrieb:

UWN is testing Prolog systems that don't exist anymore:

Jekejeke 1.5.0 https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/ulrich/iso-prolog/variable_names#73

a) There is no more publicitly available Jekejeke
   Prolog anymore, I think I wrote UWN already in the
   past about that.

b) There is only Dogelog Player, which has a 100%
   Prolog written read/write predicates including
   the variable_name/1 option. Source code is here,
   you also find GIT access etc to the Prolog system:

Quelltexte und Archive des Dogelog Spieler. https://www.xlog.ch/izytab/doclet/docs/07_spec/02_dogelog.html

c) There is an internal version of Jekejeke Prolog,
   which is way after 1.5.0, with version 1.7.0, but
   it also uses the Dogelog Payer 100% Prolog
   written read/write, so no need to test.

Mild Shock schrieb:

Guess how many newer Prolog systems allow this here:

?- [user].
p;q --> r.
    true.

On the other hand SWI-Prolog disallows it:

?- [user].
p;q --> r.

ERROR: user://1:29:
ERROR:    No permission to define dcg_nonterminal `p;q'

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

I have a question, does SWI-Prolog not anymore use
their dict syntax in the Janus interface:

import janus_swi as janus
janus.query_once("Y is X+1", {"X":1})

{'Y': 2, 'truth': True}

I don’t see _{...} anymore. When and how did this
happen? I was just thinking whether a Syntax
extension PIP is necessary. Such a PIP isn’t listed:

https://prolog-lang.org/ImplementersForum/PIPs.html

Is SWI-Prolog safe, against parsing problems,
when it still has block operators in the
background? Like can one mix and match

code that uses Janus interface with the
“new” dicts with other code that uses the
SWI-Prolog dicts based on _{...}

which we might now term the “old” dicts.
How do you access and manipulate the
“new” dicts, do the “old” operations work?

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

I recently introduce '$VAR'/1 detection in
writing again. I have now a 100% Prolog written
'$VAR'/1 capable output routine.

Somehow I found '$VAR'/1 usueful again, especially
in connection with numbersvars/3 which is in
library(compat) the two make a nice pair

of Swiss army knife for printing. What the
routines don't do, they for example don't check
variable_names/1 option for a cyclic list, so

I currently get:

/* Dogelog Player */
?- VN = ['U'=X,'V'=Y | VN], write_term(f(X,g(Y,X),Y),
[variable_names(VN)]), nl.
%%% hangs or I wasn't wainting long enough

But then SWI-Prolog does something strange,
but the error message is funny:

?- VN = ['U'=X,'V'=Y | VN], write_term(f(X,g(Y,X),Y),
[variable_names(VN)]), nl.
ERROR: Type error: `list' expected, found `'V'=V' (a compound)

Does the error message use the variable_names/1
association list that is in prepaperation somehow,
as a unintended side effect? Or what explains that

it shows 'V'=V' and not 'V'=Y'? And why does it
complain about compound? And not say something about cyclic?
This here works correctly:

?- VN = ['U'=X,'V'=Y], write_term(f(X,g(Y,X),Y),
   [variable_names(VN)]), nl.
f(U,g(V,U),V)

Mild Shock schrieb:

UWN is testing Prolog systems that don't exist anymore:

Jekejeke 1.5.0
https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/ulrich/iso-prolog/variable_names#73

a) There is no more publicitly available Jekejeke
    Prolog anymore, I think I wrote UWN already in the
    past about that.

b) There is only Dogelog Player, which has a 100%
    Prolog written read/write predicates including
    the variable_name/1 option. Source code is here,
    you also find GIT access etc to the Prolog system:

Quelltexte und Archive des Dogelog Spieler.
https://www.xlog.ch/izytab/doclet/docs/07_spec/02_dogelog.html

c) There is an internal version of Jekejeke Prolog,
    which is way after 1.5.0, with version 1.7.0, but
    it also uses the Dogelog Payer 100% Prolog
    written read/write, so no need to test.


Mild Shock schrieb:

Guess how many newer Prolog systems allow this here:

?- [user].
p;q --> r.
    true.

On the other hand SWI-Prolog disallows it:

?- [user].
p;q --> r.

ERROR: user://1:29:
ERROR:    No permission to define dcg_nonterminal `p;q'

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

.
Hi,

SARS-CoV-2 variant are classified as variant under
monitoring (VUM), variant of interest (VOI)
and variant of concern (VOC).

How would we classify PIPs. Here is a list:

- PIP 701: Tasks
Stackfull and stackless cooperative cooroutines.

- PIP 702: Events
An event loop to “asyncify” file system access, network
access, queues, terminals, windowing systems, etc…

- PIP 801: Threads
Split off from Paulo Maura’s multi-threading document.

- PIP 801: Mutex
Split off from Paulo Maura’s multi-threading document.

- PIP 802: Message queues for multi-threading
Split off from Paulo Maura’s multi-threading document.

- PIP 803: Simpler queues not for multi-threading (@marco’s ?)
Other sources here.

- PIP 901: Embrace strings
String literal, unify, (==)/2 and (@<)/2

- PIP 902: Fully embrace strings
String is/2, (=:=)/2 and (<)/2

- PIP 903: Partial strings
Compact and shared char lists.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Guess how many newer Prolog systems allow this here:

?- [user].
p;q --> r.
   true.

On the other hand SWI-Prolog disallows it:

?- [user].
p;q --> r.

ERROR: user://1:29:
ERROR:    No permission to define dcg_nonterminal `p;q'

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The PIP 903: Partial strings wasn't
so successful yet. Although pursued by
two Prolog systems, Scryer Prolog

and Trealla Prolog, the results are
not a banger performance wise. Could
have to do with some DCG pipe dreams:

/* Scryer Prolog 0.9.4-135 */
?- time((between(1,1000,_), data(X), json_chars(Y,X,[]), fail; true)).
% CPU time: 0.283s, 2_506_022 inferences
true.

/* Trealla Prolog 2.55.19 */
?- time((between(1,1000,_), data(X), json_chars(Y,X,[]), fail; true)).
% Time elapsed 0.235s, 2568003 Inferences, 10.937 MLips
true.

/* Dogelog Player for Java 1.2.1 */
?- time((between(1,1000,_), data(X), json_atom(Y,X), fail; true)).
% Zeit 40 ms, GC 0 ms, Lips 12502725, Uhr 13.08.2024 08:43
true.

/* SWI-Prolog 9.3.8 */
?- time((between(1,1000,_), data(X), atom_json_term(X,Y,[]), fail; true)).
% 44,998 inferences, 0.016 CPU in 0.006 seconds (281% CPU, 2879872 Lips)
true.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

.
Hi,

SARS-CoV-2 variant are classified as variant under
monitoring (VUM), variant of interest (VOI)
and variant of concern (VOC).

How would we classify PIPs. Here is a list:

- PIP 701: Tasks
Stackfull and stackless cooperative cooroutines.

- PIP 702: Events
An event loop to “asyncify” file system access, network
access, queues, terminals, windowing systems, etc…

- PIP 801: Threads
Split off from Paulo Maura’s multi-threading document.

- PIP 801: Mutex
Split off from Paulo Maura’s multi-threading document.

- PIP 802: Message queues for multi-threading
Split off from Paulo Maura’s multi-threading document.

- PIP 803: Simpler queues not for multi-threading (@marco’s ?)
Other sources here.

- PIP 901: Embrace strings
String literal, unify, (==)/2 and (@<)/2

- PIP 902: Fully embrace strings
String is/2, (=:=)/2 and (<)/2

- PIP 903: Partial strings
Compact and shared char lists.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Guess how many newer Prolog systems allow this here:

?- [user].
p;q --> r.
    true.

On the other hand SWI-Prolog disallows it:

?- [user].
p;q --> r.

ERROR: user://1:29:
ERROR:    No permission to define dcg_nonterminal `p;q'

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

More hot topics flowing in:

- PIP 904: Partial strings and memory mapping
Compact and shared char lists but memory mapped files.

- PIP 601: DCG
Defiinite clause grammars

- PIP 602: PIO
Clever DCGs over files using other than memory mapping.

Mild Shock schrieb:

The PIP 903: Partial strings wasn't
so successful yet. Although pursued by
two Prolog systems, Scryer Prolog

and Trealla Prolog, the results are
not a banger performance wise. Could
have to do with some DCG pipe dreams:

/* Scryer Prolog 0.9.4-135 */
?- time((between(1,1000,_), data(X), json_chars(Y,X,[]), fail; true)).
   % CPU time: 0.283s, 2_506_022 inferences
   true.

/* Trealla Prolog 2.55.19 */
?- time((between(1,1000,_), data(X), json_chars(Y,X,[]), fail; true)).
% Time elapsed 0.235s, 2568003 Inferences, 10.937 MLips
   true.

/* Dogelog Player for Java 1.2.1 */
?- time((between(1,1000,_), data(X), json_atom(Y,X), fail; true)).
% Zeit 40 ms, GC 0 ms, Lips 12502725, Uhr 13.08.2024 08:43
true.

/* SWI-Prolog 9.3.8 */
?- time((between(1,1000,_), data(X), atom_json_term(X,Y,[]), fail; true)).
% 44,998 inferences, 0.016 CPU in 0.006 seconds (281% CPU, 2879872 Lips) true.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

.
Hi,

SARS-CoV-2 variant are classified as variant under
monitoring (VUM), variant of interest (VOI)
and variant of concern (VOC).

How would we classify PIPs. Here is a list:

- PIP 701: Tasks
Stackfull and stackless cooperative cooroutines.

- PIP 702: Events
An event loop to “asyncify” file system access, network
access, queues, terminals, windowing systems, etc…

- PIP 801: Threads
Split off from Paulo Maura’s multi-threading document.

- PIP 801: Mutex
Split off from Paulo Maura’s multi-threading document.

- PIP 802: Message queues for multi-threading
Split off from Paulo Maura’s multi-threading document.

- PIP 803: Simpler queues not for multi-threading (@marco’s ?)
Other sources here.

- PIP 901: Embrace strings
String literal, unify, (==)/2 and (@<)/2

- PIP 902: Fully embrace strings
String is/2, (=:=)/2 and (<)/2

- PIP 903: Partial strings
Compact and shared char lists.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Guess how many newer Prolog systems allow this here:

?- [user].
p;q --> r.
    true.

On the other hand SWI-Prolog disallows it:

?- [user].
p;q --> r.

ERROR: user://1:29:
ERROR:    No permission to define dcg_nonterminal `p;q'

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)