5 ms·
Whom killed Prolog? Answer: It killed counter-strike agents not based on Prolog. A few quotes from the paper that I found especially interesting: Prolog is a
by zmonx 9y ago
Whom killed Prolog?
Answer: It killed counter-strike agents not based on Prolog.
A few quotes from the paper that I found especially interesting:
Prolog is a general-purpose declarative programming language, which bases strongly on a first order logic. Prolog uses notions of facts and rules, whereas execution of Prolog program is de facto a formal reasoning process. Therefore, it is very convenient to use in artificial intelligence programming.
1. C++ bot code can be rewritten to Prolog,
2. Prolog bots can be used efficiently.
And also, very importantly:
Unintended, but very positive outcome was ability to test reasoning layer independently of the game engine which was very complex system. During development of Prolog scripts standard Prolog test suites were created in order to
carry out regression tests.
This can hardly be overemphasized: Prolog is extremely well-suited for generating and writing unit tests.
Thank you for sharing!
- mLuby 9y agoWho. He killed Prolog, not him killed Prolog.
- zmonx 9y agoNo, whom! Prolog killed him, not Prolog killed he. To get the reference, you have to follow some HN submissions on Prolog...
- Twisol 9y agoReference aside, OVS is a very rare word order in English. Most would expect "Prolog killed whom". Then again, "Prolog killed who" is broadly considered acceptable, so whom am I to judge?
- zmonx 9y agoWhom and who are we to judge!
- fusiongyro 9y agoExcept the complement of the verb of being is nominative. "Who am I to judge?" is correct (think, "I am he (who is) to judge"). Also in old-fashioned phone etiquette, "May I speak to X?" "This is she." Of course, OP was extremely opaque and I didn't understand what they meant either. Is the point of language to be understood, or to adhere to invented rules? This has been a fun diversion! Only on a Prolog thread...
- Twisol 9y agoI suspect "Whom am I to judge" is also correct, but only because of a technicality. (It was an intentional play on words, so even moreso now, who am I to judge?) "_Whom_ am I to judge", asking which people ought I be judgemental about, versus "_Who am I_ to judge", meaning I really ought not throw stones in glass houses.
- fusiongyro 9y agoI think you and the OP are very unlikely to be understood using that construction.