3 ms·

https://github.com/SWI-Prolog/packages-clpqr/issues/4 https://github.com/SWI-Prolog/packages-clpqr/issues/4 Also cited at https://www.metalevel.at/swissues htt

by rscho 8y ago

https://github.com/SWI-Prolog/packages-clpqr/issues/4 https://github.com/SWI-Prolog/packages-clpqr/issues/4 Also cited at https://www.metalevel.at/swissues https://www.metalevel.at/swissues I also read it on SO, but can't find it. I do however remember that it was said that the SWI lib was ported from the SICSTUS one, and that mistakes were added in the process, and that it couldn't be recommended for that reason.

0db532a0 8y ago
Out of interest, do you know whether there are any problems with the SICStus version, and is there anything wrong with using SICStus over SWI?
- rscho 8y ago
  It was stated that the SICSTUS version was correct, but I am no expert. To my knowledge, SICSTUS is the prolog Rolls-Royce, so there's certainly nothing wrong with that.