2 ms·
I went through a struggle trying to implement an MMI for a telecom product using Prolog, it was just not performant enough. Around the same time, Joe Armstrong
by SanjayMehta 4y ago
I went through a struggle trying to implement an MMI for a telecom product using Prolog, it was just not performant enough.
Around the same time, Joe Armstrong of Ericsson was experimenting with Prolog to build a switching system. Erlang came out of that effort, essentially stripping out the backtracking - wish I had thought of that.
Elixir is built on Erlang and is definitely a production language.
You might find both Erlang and Elixir viable.
- dmitriid 4y agoNothing is left in Erlang/Elixir from Prolog. Except some of the Erlang syntax.
- hosh 4y agoThere are several attempts to put it back: https://9to5tutorial.com/the-story-of-how-to-make-a-prolog-compiler-with-elixir https://9to5tutorial.com/the-story-of-how-to-make-a-prolog-c... https://github.com/k1complete/exprolog https://github.com/k1complete/exprolog
- knewter 4y agoRobert Virding's erlog as well: https://github.com/rvirding/erlog https://github.com/rvirding/erlog (rvirding GOAT)
- SanjayMehta 4y agoPattern matching remains and is my favourite feature.
- moffkalast 4y agoNone of this should be its own language, I'm not sure why people are still working in that direction when it's been clear for nearly decades that it's barely possible to use as a standalone language. Like if somebody implemented Tensorflow in its own separate weird language and insisted that's the best and only way to use it. I think people are far too constrained by adhering to what Prolog is standardized as, making sure there's literally no advancement whatsoever. We just need a more practical formal logic library or type or something for your average language without any stupid string definitions or passing literal prolog in for execution. I mean is that too much to ask?