3 ms·
Grakn was also recently posted on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14471238 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14471238 In that thread, I show how y
by zmonx 9y ago
Grakn was also recently posted on HN:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14471238 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14471238
In that thread, I show how you can express the sample relation in Prolog. Maybe you can go into more detail, either here or in that thread, on the advantages of Grakn over Prolog for such cases?
- domenico_c 9y agoSomeone from my team replied. Thanks for taking the time to start the discussion on the comparison, we have a few people with a computational logic background here and we plan to publish a blog post on the topic soon!
- zmonx 9y agoPerfect, I am looking forward to reading the blog post! I hope it will also mention Prolog as an important influence. As to your second issue above: Please note that there are many collections and even entire books that describe antipatterns of Java, C++ and many other programming languages. In my experience, programmers from these communities quickly learn to avoid these antipatterns. In the Prolog community, this happens more slowly, but it does happen too. There are very good reasons to avoid !/0 and other impure constructs in logic programs. In my view, the key issue is to find and teach better constructs that should be used instead, and the best alternative language constructs are still waiting to be discovered. In this spirit, I fully agree with you that we should keep Prolog's best aspects, and extend them as far as we can into the directions we need.