From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

This wasn't clear to me. That there is a
veritable war going on between Scryer Prolog
and Ciao Prolog. One protagonist

being Markus Triska, famous by the "Power
of Prolog", and the other protagonist Manuel
V. Hermenegildo somehow backed by the

Prolog education group (PEG) and SWI ? So who
will win the war, and exercise world domaninance
in constraint logic programming, based

on bogus notions such as "pure Prolog", which
are inherently inconsistent? The war is
mainly fought over teaching materials distributed,

less over tangible systems and applications.
Currently I would say the clear winner is
Markus Triska with 9 adoptions:

- As of 2018, Norbert Zeh
- As of 2018, Andrej Bauer
- As of 2018, José A. Alonso Jiménez
- As of 2019, Adam Dingle
- As of 2019, Dylan Schwesinger
- As of 2020, Andrea Schwertner Charão
- As of 2020, Alejandro Guerra Hernández
- As of 2021, Ilkka Kokkarinen
- As of 2025, Wang-Zhou Dai
https://github.com/triska/the-power-of-prolog

So it currently stands at 9:0 for Triska
vs Hermenegildo.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

Who will win the new Prolog race?
SWI or Scryer? Is it enough that SWI-Prolog
has teamed up with Ciao Prolog?

What about resources that really can
code a Prolog systems. SWI-Prolog is
now doomed to have professional moron

Julio Di Egidio on board. Not sure whether
he will ever become a heavy committer to
SWI-Prolog source. But who knows, we should

also give Julio Di Egidio a chance. My
gut feeling at the moment:

- SWI-Prolog:
  Pull Requests 10 Open / 560 Closed

- Scryer Prolog:
  Pull Requests 40 Open / 751 Closed

In the past I would measure active committers.
But the new "liveness" indicator of a Prolog
system could be indeed Pull Requests.

So who will win?

P.S.: Data sources:

https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog/pulls

https://github.com/SWI-Prolog/swipl-devel/pulls

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

I suspect that this war will be as bloody
and useless as the Thirty Years war, that
ravaged Europe. The victimes will be students

that learn useless stuff, because a narrow view
of logic is offered. Not to speak of the
dangerous nonsense of "pure Prolog", adding

an adjective from "logic", i.e. pure to
a thing from "computation", i.e. Prolog. Extensions
such as Liquid Haskell or Tabled Constraints,

are as useless as well. Except if you think
your knowledge and reasoning fits into
generalized facts, as we have already studied

40 years ago based on my own ProQuel:

"Following [KKR90], we call an implication of the
form A <- c_1, & .. & C_n, (n > 0) where A is a
user-defined atom and the ci are atomic constraints
a generalized fact (generalized tuple). In order
to emphasize the special nature of generalized facts,
we will in the following often use the notation
< A | C1, ..., Cn>" https://www.research-collection.ethz.ch/entities/publication/43d19c38-122f-43d7-a8df-82e001e55075

Have Fun everybody!

Bye

P.S.: Just make a reality check from modern
AI. How large is a context. Is a context a
generalized fact, or a collection of generalizd
facts? Or maybe something else? What is it?

How long will the generalized facts idea be at the party?

Databases and Higher Types
It maybe of interest that I did not get into this
line of work from the database side. I began with
attempts to treat various classic philosophical problems
as simply as possible in a modal context, work culminating
in [4]. This, in turn, led to an interest in higher
type modal logics, connected with a desire to understand
Godel's ontological argument. My work on this can be found in.
Databases came in, unnoticed, by a side door. But they
are at the party, and it may be they will have a good time https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225181835

But the above is possibly too benevolent, should
be challenged by AI, and especially by generative AI.

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

This wasn't clear to me. That there is a
veritable war going on between Scryer Prolog
and Ciao Prolog. One protagonist

being Markus Triska, famous by the "Power
of Prolog", and the other protagonist Manuel
V. Hermenegildo somehow backed by the

Prolog education group (PEG) and SWI ? So who
will win the war, and exercise world domaninance
in constraint logic programming, based

on bogus notions such as "pure Prolog", which
are inherently inconsistent? The war is
mainly fought over teaching materials distributed,

less over tangible systems and applications.
Currently I would say the clear winner is
Markus Triska with 9 adoptions:

- As of 2018, Norbert Zeh
- As of 2018, Andrej Bauer
- As of 2018, José A. Alonso Jiménez
- As of 2019, Adam Dingle
- As of 2019, Dylan Schwesinger
- As of 2020, Andrea Schwertner Charão
- As of 2020, Alejandro Guerra Hernández
- As of 2021, Ilkka Kokkarinen
- As of 2025, Wang-Zhou Dai
https://github.com/triska/the-power-of-prolog

So it currently stands at 9:0 for Triska
vs Hermenegildo.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

Who will win the new Prolog race?
SWI or Scryer? Is it enough that SWI-Prolog
has teamed up with Ciao Prolog?

What about resources that really can
code a Prolog systems. SWI-Prolog is
now doomed to have professional moron

Julio Di Egidio on board. Not sure whether
he will ever become a heavy committer to
SWI-Prolog source. But who knows, we should

also give Julio Di Egidio a chance. My
gut feeling at the moment:

- SWI-Prolog:
   Pull Requests 10 Open / 560 Closed

- Scryer Prolog:
   Pull Requests 40 Open / 751 Closed

In the past I would measure active committers.
But the new "liveness" indicator of a Prolog
system could be indeed Pull Requests.

So who will win?

P.S.: Data sources:

https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog/pulls

https://github.com/SWI-Prolog/swipl-devel/pulls

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

Pitty SWI cannot throw Markus Triska out of
their discourse forum or out of the awful
PIP forum also on discourse. He is not present there.

I am pretty sure they would do it if they
could, they are so desparate. The newest
gimmick in their fight is this pearl of warfare:

Our prototype has been implemented in SWI Prolog,
and we have already tested this early-stage system
with potential clients such as Siemens China and
Shell India. Comparison between Prolog systems as
input for the upcoming conference https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog/discussions/3150

LoL, nice try Dutchies. But who believes this
inbreed nonsense. Why not compare with some
industrial strength C++ constraint solver?

And what does Shell India even mean? Historically
it has its roots indeed with the Dutchies:

formerly known as "the Royal Dutch Company for
the Exploitation of Petroleum Wells in
the Dutch East Indies"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_plc

But I suspect its an international company
with head quarters in London. According to
MarketScreener, about 52.95% of Shell is
held by “Institutional” investors.

Geographical Distribution (by Country) of
Major Shareholders. Based on MarketScreener’s
breakdown of the top ~1,000 shareholders:

United States ~23.6%
United Kingdom ~17.5%
Norway ~3.28%
Switzerland ~1.56%
Canada ~1.46%
Germany ~1.06%

According to MarketScreener’s breakdown of
Shell’s top ~1,000 shareholders, India is
not listed explicitly in their “geographical
origin of shareholders” chart.

MarketScreener reports that ~44–45% of
Shell’s shares (within their top-1,000-holder
data set) are “Unknown” — meaning they can’t
clearly map them to a specific
institution or geography.

Because of that, even if some Indian investors
hold Shell shares, they may be lumped into
the “unknown” category if they aren’t among
the largest disclosed institutional holders,
or if their holdings are registered through
nominee accounts / omnibus custodians.

Bye

P.S.: Just be happy to get called Dutchies:

"Be happy they call you Dutchies, usually
we Easter Europeans get called Alocoholics
or thieves around these regions lol" https://www.reddit.com/r/Netherlands/comments/1ehqy3a/calling_us_dutch_people_dutchies/


Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

Who will win the new Prolog race?
SWI or Scryer? Is it enough that SWI-Prolog
has teamed up with Ciao Prolog?

What about resources that really can
code a Prolog systems. SWI-Prolog is
now doomed to have professional moron

Julio Di Egidio on board. Not sure whether
he will ever become a heavy committer to
SWI-Prolog source. But who knows, we should

also give Julio Di Egidio a chance. My
gut feeling at the moment:

- SWI-Prolog:
  Pull Requests 10 Open / 560 Closed

- Scryer Prolog:
  Pull Requests 40 Open / 751 Closed

In the past I would measure active committers.
But the new "liveness" indicator of a Prolog
system could be indeed Pull Requests.

So who will win?

P.S.: Data sources:

https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog/pulls

https://github.com/SWI-Prolog/swipl-devel/pulls

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

There was this caboom when SWI7 introduced
dicts. But at the same time Markus Triska (Side B)
stopped contributing to SWI (Side A) ?

Side A now stands at a precarious crossroads,
its future hinging on innovations whose success
is far from guaranteed. The irony is striking:
the very battle consuming its attention is fought

over familiar, time-tested techniques,
while the exotic approaches that once promised
differentiation remain unproven. Compounding
the dilemma, one of Side A’s original core

developers—who helped shape its early trajectory—
is now contributing to Side B’s efforts,
carrying insight and experience that subtly
tilt the balance. The technical debt that

arose from earlier choices to diverge from
standard practices or established collaborations
is still manageable, yet it lingers like a
quiet undercurrent, shaping both strategy

and execution. This is a story of ambition and
ingenuity, but also of hubris: of how the
pursuit of the novel and exotic can, paradoxically,
leave an organization vulnerable, even as it bets

on a future that may or may not arrive.
- ChatGPT, 24.11.2025

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

Pitty SWI cannot throw Markus Triska out of
their discourse forum or out of the awful
PIP forum also on discourse. He is not present there.

I am pretty sure they would do it if they
could, they are so desparate. The newest
gimmick in their fight is this pearl of warfare:

Our prototype has been implemented in SWI Prolog,
and we have already tested this early-stage system
with potential clients such as Siemens China and
Shell India. Comparison between Prolog systems as
input for the upcoming conference https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog/discussions/3150

LoL, nice try Dutchies. But who believes this
inbreed nonsense. Why not compare with some
industrial strength C++ constraint solver?

And what does Shell India even mean? Historically
it has its roots indeed with the Dutchies:

formerly known as "the Royal Dutch Company for
the Exploitation of Petroleum Wells in
the Dutch East Indies"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_plc

But I suspect its an international company
with head quarters in London. According to
MarketScreener, about 52.95% of Shell is
held by “Institutional” investors.

Geographical Distribution (by Country) of
Major Shareholders. Based on MarketScreener’s
breakdown of the top ~1,000 shareholders:

United States    ~23.6%
United Kingdom    ~17.5%
Norway    ~3.28%
Switzerland    ~1.56%
Canada    ~1.46%
Germany    ~1.06%

According to MarketScreener’s breakdown of
Shell’s top ~1,000 shareholders, India is
not listed explicitly in their “geographical
origin of shareholders” chart.

MarketScreener reports that ~44–45% of
Shell’s shares (within their top-1,000-holder
data set) are “Unknown” — meaning they can’t
clearly map them to a specific
institution or geography.

Because of that, even if some Indian investors
hold Shell shares, they may be lumped into
the “unknown” category if they aren’t among
the largest disclosed institutional holders,
or if their holdings are registered through
nominee accounts / omnibus custodians.

Bye

P.S.: Just be happy to get called Dutchies:

"Be happy they call you Dutchies, usually
we Easter Europeans get called Alocoholics
or thieves around these regions lol" https://www.reddit.com/r/Netherlands/comments/1ehqy3a/calling_us_dutch_people_dutchies/

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

Who will win the new Prolog race?
SWI or Scryer? Is it enough that SWI-Prolog
has teamed up with Ciao Prolog?

What about resources that really can
code a Prolog systems. SWI-Prolog is
now doomed to have professional moron

Julio Di Egidio on board. Not sure whether
he will ever become a heavy committer to
SWI-Prolog source. But who knows, we should

also give Julio Di Egidio a chance. My
gut feeling at the moment:

- SWI-Prolog:
   Pull Requests 10 Open / 560 Closed

- Scryer Prolog:
   Pull Requests 40 Open / 751 Closed

In the past I would measure active committers.
But the new "liveness" indicator of a Prolog
system could be indeed Pull Requests.

So who will win?

P.S.: Data sources:

https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog/pulls

https://github.com/SWI-Prolog/swipl-devel/pulls

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

Simple test case, indirect permutation:

/* SWI-Tinker 32 bits, version 9.3.35 */
% 127,767,777 inferences, 4.456 CPU in 4.456 seconds
(100% CPU, 28673199 Lips)
true.

Ok a bit slower, but no WASM, only JavaScript!

/* Dogelog Player 2.1.4 for JavaScript */
% Zeit 4705 ms, GC 0 ms, Lips 10386607

TinyCLP is written in 100% Prolog, LoL.

Bye

P.S.: I can also beat it on 64-bit:

/* SWI-Prolog threaded, 64 bits, version 9.3.35 */
?- time(test).
% 127,670,227 inferences, 2.031 CPU in 2.042 seconds
(99% CPU, 62853035 Lips)
true.

/* Dogelog Player 2.1.4 for Java */
?- time(test).
% Zeit 1567 ms, GC 0 ms, Lips 31186335
true.

P.S.: This was the test case:

:- use_module(library(clpfd)).

test :-
length(L, 9),
L ins 1..9,
all_different(L),
label(L),
fail.
test.

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

There was this caboom when SWI7 introduced
dicts. But at the same time Markus Triska (Side B)
stopped contributing to SWI (Side A) ?

Side A now stands at a precarious crossroads,
its future hinging on innovations whose success
is far from guaranteed. The irony is striking:
the very battle consuming its attention is fought

over familiar, time-tested techniques,
while the exotic approaches that once promised
differentiation remain unproven. Compounding
the dilemma, one of Side A’s original core

developers—who helped shape its early trajectory—
is now contributing to Side B’s efforts,
carrying insight and experience that subtly
tilt the balance. The technical debt that

arose from earlier choices to diverge from
standard practices or established collaborations
is still manageable, yet it lingers like a
quiet undercurrent, shaping both strategy

and execution. This is a story of ambition and
ingenuity, but also of hubris: of how the
pursuit of the novel and exotic can, paradoxically,
leave an organization vulnerable, even as it bets

on a future that may or may not arrive.
- ChatGPT, 24.11.2025

Bye

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

Sometimes my new Railgun CLP for Dogelog
Player is blazing fast. Like here:

?- time((euler(_), fail; true)).
% Zeit 1ms, GC 0ms, Lips 6675k
true.

?- euler(_L), maplist(deref, _L, R).
R = [3, 7, 1];
R = [1, 5, 3];
fail.

Compare to Scryer Prolog:

/* Scryer Prolog 0.10 */
?- time((euler(_), fail; true)).
% CPU time: 0.203s, 326_594 inferences
true.
?- euler(L).
L = [1,5,3]
; L = [3,7,1]
; false.

The test case:

/**
* find 3 non-zero digits such
* that the number equals the cube sum:
*
* 371 = 3^3 + 7^3 + 1^3
* 153 = 1^3 + 5^3 + 3^3
*/

% euler(-List)
euler(L) :-
L = [X,Y,Z],
L ins 1..9,
100*X+10*Y+Z #= X*X*X+Y*Y*Y+Z*Z*Z,
labeling([ff], L).

Similar problem to:
https://math.berkeley.edu/~elafandi/euler/p30/

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2