4 ms·
The question is though: had we invested all that time and money of imperative programming and object-oriented, in Prolog too, would it still be the case of not
by sirodoht 10y ago
The question is though: had we invested all that time and money of imperative programming and object-oriented, in Prolog too, would it still be the case of not delivering?
Do we include in our thinking the full potential of the language? I am thinking this is what happened with functional programming too. Only lately we understand its true potential, starting with some functional concepts in Python and JavaScript in the early and mid 90s and continuing with ES6, Rust and Swift.
- ced 10y agoThere has been quite a lot invested in Prolog and its successors. Eg. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_generation_computer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_generation_computer It's just fundamentally much harder to get anywhere than with procedural languages.
- YeGoblynQueenne 10y ago>> It's just fundamentally much harder to get anywhere than with procedural languages. It's harder to learn than procedural languages. Once you know what you're doing it's much easier to get anywhere with it.
- ced 10y agoI meant that designing and implementing good declarative logical languages is an open research problem, because logical inference is basically unsolved. Procedural languages are trivial, in comparison.
- YeGoblynQueenne 10y agoLINQ and the C# compiler (with pattern matching proposals in 5.0, I think, but not yet implemented) is inching closer to some of Prolog's ideas. In that sense there is a bit of a risk of implementing a "buggy, slow" Prolog in the process of re-inventing its wheels.