Repeating verbatim a post on a Haskell forum, someone talking about the Curry-Howard-Lambek correspondence and saying "you can write arbitrary Prolog in Haskell

Repeating verbatim a post on a Haskell forum, someone talking about the Curry-Howard-Lambek correspondence and saying "you can write arbitrary Prolog in Haskell types". Seems most advanced type systems are already Turing-complete and based on unification matching, so I didn't see much reason to disbelieve it, though I realize that might be a little oversold. Obviously it doesn't look like Prolog, and you don't necessarily even want the Turing-completeness in your type system -- or at least not to have to rely on it anyway. But I still think the parallels are clear enough that it'd make for a pretty relevant piece of a course in logic programming.