PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA (Chuck Restivo, The Moderator) (01/18/86)
PROLOG Digest Monday, 20 Jan 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 4
Today's Topics:
Announcement - Call For Papers,
Implementation - C-Prolog 1.5 and VMS,
LP Philosophy - What is the expressive power of Prolog?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 17 Jan 1986 12:54-EST
From: Peter Henderson <pbh%suny-sb.csnet@CSNET-RELAY>
Subject: Call For Papers
Call For Papers
ACM SIGSOFT/SIGPLAN Symposium on
Practical Software Development Environments
December 9 - 11, 1986, Palo Alto, California
Practical Software Development Environments assist with the
development and maintenance of larger, better, and more reliable
software systems. The symposium will address issues fundamental
to the development of such practical environments.
The logic programming research community is invited to submit
papers relating to programming environments to improve software
development.
For more information please refer to the call for papers which
appears in:
Communication of the ACM, January 1986, page A-67
IEEE Computer, January 1986, page 74
or contact: Peter B. Henderson (pbh@sbcs.CSNet)
Department of Computer Science
SUNY at Stony Brook
Stony Brook, N.Y. 11794
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 86 21:15:26 pst
From: Mike Newton <Newton@cit-vlsi.ARPA>
Subject: C-Prolog 1.5 and VMS
Yes, there is a bug in the CProlog source, which the Berkeley
compiler blindly ignores (Its okay, because both elements are
the first in the structure). We've been running with the
change you mentioned for a few months.
In a couple of weeks I'm going to post a small announcement
regarding an 'updated' version of CProlog. We used it a lot
(!!!!) in constructing our Prolog compiler for the IBM-370/
4341/308x/3090 series computers, and have made many changes
-- bug fixes, speed improvements, Dec-20 compatibility,
portability, .... .
I've talked to Fernando Pereira and Edinburgh about duplicating
it for people that already have CProlog licenses, and both
were agreeable. The only delay is fixing a bug in the IO
routines and testing.
- Mike
ps: Timings of our compiler as of Dec 31, 1985: (naive reverse)
IBM 4341-12 85 KLips
IBM 3081 480 KLips (one processor)
IBM 3090 750 KLips (one processor)
Figures are +/- about 5%, with naive reverse as the test case.
No mode declarations were used (partly due to the fact that the
would have made only a very minor difference). Speeds show go
up roughly 5-10 % on the faster models with a few changes.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 86 22:55 EST
From: Hewitt@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: What is the expressive power of Prolog?
Ching-Tsun Chow raised a very good question in his message
to Prolog Digest: [see V3, issue no. 44 Prolog Digest]
Although your question appears to be rhetorical, I believe
that it deserves to be taken seriously. Do you completely
discount the importance of expressive capability for Prolog?
What do you think are the tradeoffs between the expressive
capablility of Prolog and other aspects of its design?
By definition machine languages have the strongest expressive
capability. We need languages of strong expressive capability
that are higher level than machine language. The evidence
shows that Prolog is NOT such a language.
-- Carl Hewitt
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************