Jump to content

Talk:Comparison of Prolog implementations

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cmungall (talk | contribs) at 17:15, 6 October 2010. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

A nice comparison between Prolog implementations is here:

http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/ulrich/prolog_misc/systems.html

For many users of interest are especially the CLP capabilities.

This is very useful. I added a link under the "external links" section. Cmungall (talk) 17:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Amzi! Prolog

Can you include Amzi! Prolog, in the comparison table, please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.82.131.79 (talk) 19:17, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TCO

It would be extremely useful to see which systems implement Tail call optimization. Is anyone aware of a comprehensive survey? I'm sure the main systems (XSB, SWI, Sicstus etc) all implement this, but some of the niche prologs may not. I'm particularly interested in which JVM prologs implement TCO - I did some informal testing a while ago and the results were disappointing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmungall (talk • contribs) 16:59, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Prova

Would it be appropriate to add Prova to the list? It's not strictly a prolog engine but has enough overlap to be relevant —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmungall (talk • contribs) 17:07, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Comparison_of_Prolog_implementations&oldid=389134376"