From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Prolog, ISO Prolog, and the whole indecent compartment, 50 years
of logic programming and never ever getting it right, just a pile
of substandard crap: meanwhile the language spec costs re4350 part 1
only (read, a closed academic and then corporative game), to just
mention the tip of the iceberg, and these parasites and abusive
cheats are even giving prices to each other...

Indeed, with the exception of some niche, people have absolutely
no clue how fundamental logic programming actually is: and now I am implementing a new Prolog, the Prolog everybody has been dreaming
of but couldn't even ask about, and completely for free: besides
shaming you and your bullshit, about what is possible or impossible
to begin with, I do hope you and the whole incorporated gang go out
of business, to put it lightly.

-Julio
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

and now I am implementing a new Prolog

Mind then gap, there might be a <NEWLINE> lurking!

LoL

Bye

Julio Di Egidio schrieb:

Prolog, ISO Prolog, and the whole indecent compartment, 50 years
of logic programming and never ever getting it right, just a pile
of substandard crap: meanwhile the language spec costs re4350 part 1
only (read, a closed academic and then corporative game), to just
mention the tip of the iceberg, and these parasites and abusive
cheats are even giving prices to each other...

Indeed, with the exception of some niche, people have absolutely
no clue how fundamental logic programming actually is: and now I am implementing a new Prolog, the Prolog everybody has been dreaming
of but couldn't even ask about, and completely for free: besides
shaming you and your bullshit, about what is possible or impossible
to begin with, I do hope you and the whole incorporated gang go out
of business, to put it lightly.

-Julio

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

On 11/10/2025 10:35, Mild Shock wrote:

Hi,

and now I am implementing a new Prolog

Mind then gap, there might be a <NEWLINE> lurking!

LoL

LOL indeed, as that's the level of the discussion.

I have the lexer mostly ready, just missing full Unicode support:
design, implementation, and testing, but I need to improve on the
testing, for which I am taking a detour and building a Regex
analyser and string generator.

The implementation is in C#.Net, which I find great for prototyping,
anyway what I mean is a *specification and reference implementation*,
then anybody can rewrite it in Java or ANSI C or anything (I am being
careful in the constructs I am using to make that seamless), and sell
that if they like...

You are a good tester: I would gladly keep you in the loop if you
are seriously interested.

-Julio

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

Only morons waste time with regex when they have Prolog!
Its amazing, since Alain Colmerauer was already
juggling with a kind of transducers:

"We present some very general grammars in which
each re-writing rule is of the type: replace such
and such sequence of trees by such and such another
sequence of trees."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225124810

Still the Prolog community is to stupid to
transduce CR, CR LF and LF into LF. Thats quite a
feat. BTW, this should do using DCG semi-contexts:

replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r, 0'\n], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\n], replace.
replace, [X] --> [X], replace.
replace --> [].

Works on my side:

?- replace("foo\rbar\r\nbaz", _L), atom_codes(A, _L).
A = 'foo\nbar\nbaz'

Now optimize it to produce 0'\n as early as
possible and use a state machine, so that you
can implement it low level in your streams.

Have Fun!

Bye

Julio Di Egidio schrieb:

On 11/10/2025 10:35, Mild Shock wrote:

Hi,

and now I am implementing a new Prolog

Mind then gap, there might be a <NEWLINE> lurking!

LoL

LOL indeed, as that's the level of the discussion.

I have the lexer mostly ready, just missing full Unicode support:
design, implementation, and testing, but I need to improve on the
testing, for which I am taking a detour and building a Regex
analyser and string generator.

The implementation is in C#.Net, which I find great for prototyping,
anyway what I mean is a *specification and reference implementation*,
then anybody can rewrite it in Java or ANSI C or anything (I am being
careful in the constructs I am using to make that seamless), and sell
that if they like...

You are a good tester: I would gladly keep you in the loop if you
are seriously interested.

-Julio

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

You can compare the generated plain Prolog code
for replace/2. It varies among Prolog systems.
A translation that moves the semi-context into

the head could cause steadfastness problems,
on the other hand moving the first terminal in
the body of the grammar into the head is ok:

/* Dogelog Player, SWI-Prolog */
replace([13, 10|A], B) :-
replace(A, C),
B=[10|C].
replace([13|A], B) :-
replace(A, C),
B=[10|C].
replace([10|A], B) :-
replace(A, C),
B=[10|C].
replace([A|B], C) :-
replace(B, D),
C=[A|D].
replace(A, B) :-
A=B.

Some Prolog systems cannot do the head movement:

/* Trealla Prolog, Scryer Prolog */
replace(A,B) :-
(A=[13,10|C],replace(C,D)),B=[10|D].
replace(A,B) :-
(A=[13|C],replace(C,D)),B=[10|D].
replace(A,B) :-
(A=[10|C],replace(C,D)),B=[10|D].
replace(A,B) :-
(A=[C|D],replace(D,E)),B=[C|E].
replace(A,B) :-
A=B.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

Only morons waste time with regex when they have Prolog!
Its amazing, since Alain Colmerauer was already
juggling with a kind of transducers:

"We present some very general grammars in which
each re-writing rule is of the type: replace such
and such sequence of trees by such and such another
sequence of trees."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225124810

Still the Prolog community is to stupid to
transduce CR, CR LF and LF into LF. Thats quite a
feat. BTW, this should do using DCG semi-contexts:

replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r, 0'\n], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\n], replace.
replace, [X] --> [X], replace.
replace --> [].

Works on my side:

?- replace("foo\rbar\r\nbaz", _L), atom_codes(A, _L).
A = 'foo\nbar\nbaz'

Now optimize it to produce 0'\n as early as
possible and use a state machine, so that you
can implement it low level in your streams.

Have Fun!

Bye

Julio Di Egidio schrieb:

On 11/10/2025 10:35, Mild Shock wrote:

Hi,

and now I am implementing a new Prolog

Mind then gap, there might be a <NEWLINE> lurking!

LoL

LOL indeed, as that's the level of the discussion.

I have the lexer mostly ready, just missing full Unicode support:
design, implementation, and testing, but I need to improve on the
testing, for which I am taking a detour and building a Regex
analyser and string generator.

The implementation is in C#.Net, which I find great for prototyping,
anyway what I mean is a *specification and reference implementation*,
then anybody can rewrite it in Java or ANSI C or anything (I am being
careful in the constructs I am using to make that seamless), and sell
that if they like...

You are a good tester: I would gladly keep you in the loop if you
are seriously interested.

-Julio

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

Actually I have no explanation why the new DCG
standard is so bad. That it sees semi-contexts
only being terminals. Non-terminals are great:

seq([c|L]) --> [c], seq(L).
seq([]) --> [].

example3, [x], seq(L) --> [a], seq(L), [b], example3.
example3, [X] --> [X], example3.
example3 --> [].

/* Transformation */
?- example3([a,a,c,b,b], X).
X = [a, x, c, b]

?- example3([a,a,c,c,c,b,b], X).
X = [a, x, c, c, c, b]

Why did the whole Prolog community lost touch
with the roots of Prolog, namely Alain Colmerauers
Metamorphosis Grammars.

My only explanation is a dumbing down by
aspirations such as Picta, Minizinc, etc.. the
whole useless CLP(X) nonsense.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

You can compare the generated plain Prolog code
for replace/2. It varies among Prolog systems.
A translation that moves the semi-context into

the head could cause steadfastness problems,
on the other hand moving the first terminal in
the body of the grammar into the head is ok:

/* Dogelog Player, SWI-Prolog */
replace([13, 10|A], B) :-
-a-a-a replace(A, C),
-a-a-a B=[10|C].
replace([13|A], B) :-
-a-a-a replace(A, C),
-a-a-a B=[10|C].
replace([10|A], B) :-
-a-a-a replace(A, C),
-a-a-a B=[10|C].
replace([A|B], C) :-
-a-a-a replace(B, D),
-a-a-a C=[A|D].
replace(A, B) :-
-a-a-a A=B.

Some Prolog systems cannot do the head movement:

/* Trealla Prolog, Scryer Prolog */
replace(A,B) :-
-a-a (A=[13,10|C],replace(C,D)),B=[10|D].
replace(A,B) :-
-a-a (A=[13|C],replace(C,D)),B=[10|D].
replace(A,B) :-
-a-a (A=[10|C],replace(C,D)),B=[10|D].
replace(A,B) :-
-a-a (A=[C|D],replace(D,E)),B=[C|E].
replace(A,B) :-
-a-a A=B.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

Only morons waste time with regex when they have Prolog!
Its amazing, since Alain Colmerauer was already
juggling with a kind of transducers:

"We present some very general grammars in which
each re-writing rule is of the type: replace such
and such sequence of trees by such and such another
sequence of trees."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225124810

Still the Prolog community is to stupid to
transduce CR, CR LF and LF into LF. Thats quite a
feat. BTW, this should do using DCG semi-contexts:

replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r, 0'\n], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\n], replace.
replace, [X] --> [X], replace.
replace --> [].

Works on my side:

?- replace("foo\rbar\r\nbaz", _L), atom_codes(A, _L).
A = 'foo\nbar\nbaz'

Now optimize it to produce 0'\n as early as
possible and use a state machine, so that you
can implement it low level in your streams.

Have Fun!

Bye

Julio Di Egidio schrieb:

On 11/10/2025 10:35, Mild Shock wrote:

Hi,

and now I am implementing a new Prolog

Mind then gap, there might be a <NEWLINE> lurking!

LoL

LOL indeed, as that's the level of the discussion.

I have the lexer mostly ready, just missing full Unicode support:
design, implementation, and testing, but I need to improve on the
testing, for which I am taking a detour and building a Regex
analyser and string generator.

The implementation is in C#.Net, which I find great for prototyping,
anyway what I mean is a *specification and reference implementation*,
then anybody can rewrite it in Java or ANSI C or anything (I am being
careful in the constructs I am using to make that seamless), and sell
that if they like...

You are a good tester: I would gladly keep you in the loop if you
are seriously interested.

-Julio

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

On 12/10/2025 00:35, Mild Shock wrote:

Only morons waste time with regex when they have Prolog!

You are just so fucking clueless. Keep eating mud.

*Plonk*

Julio

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

You are just too lazy to ever build a Prolog
system, especially a Self Hosting System.
This is mostlikely out of reach.

Most people fall back to RegEx and a couple
of other compiler generators. Since they don't
now how to Bootstrap a Prolog system B,

with the help of a Prolog system A. But
its not so difficult. Ultimately starting with
any existing Prolog system, like for example

SWI-Prolog, etc.., you can bootstrap another Prolog
system Target-X. Its especially simply if
you have the intention that Target-X has a

high amount of facilities written in Prolog
itself. i.e. a 100% Prolog Prolog. Such a
100% Prolog Prolog would make a good reference

implementation. But I doubt that anybody
currently in the Prolog community can do it.
The result could a so called Self-Hosting

system, thats the moment when the Target-X
has progressed so far that it can "compile"
itself. Thats the best moment of such a

Bootstrapping, because then you can forget
the Prolog parent system, such as SWI-Prolog,
etc... From then on your system is independent

of another Prolog system.

Bye

Julio Di Egidio schrieb:

On 12/10/2025 00:35, Mild Shock wrote:

Only morons waste time with regex when they have Prolog!

You are just so fucking clueless.-a Keep eating mud.

*Plonk*

Julio

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

The first historical event of a self hosting
compiler, was LISP 1.5, as documented here:

"This memo introduces the brand new LISP 1.5
Compiler designed and programmed by Tim Hart
and Mike Levin. It is written entirely in LISP
and is the first compiler that has ever compiled
itself by being executed interpretively." http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/mit/ai/aim/AIM-039.pdf

It also shows an interesting twist of
bootstrapping tricks. You can bootstrap a
series of gradual refinements. Like start

only with a primitive Prolog interpreter, and
then gradually add features to make it more
advanced. This can also involved cross compilation,

until a stage is reached where the next plateau
can be climbed in a self-hosting manner. You have
to build at least twice. Take the LISP 1.5 example,

the first time you build the system, you use
the interpreter machine M_I and the compiler code C,
to derive a compiler machine M_C:

M_C := M_I(C)

With above step you didn't arrive yet at a self
hosting system, the above is not a fixpoint. The
proof of the pudding is yet another run:

M_C' := M_C(C)

And hopefully you have M_C' = M_C.

Bye

Julio Di Egidio schrieb:

Prolog, ISO Prolog, and the whole indecent compartment, 50 years
of logic programming and never ever getting it right, just a pile
of substandard crap: meanwhile the language spec costs re4350 part 1
only (read, a closed academic and then corporative game), to just
mention the tip of the iceberg, and these parasites and abusive
cheats are even giving prices to each other...

Indeed, with the exception of some niche, people have absolutely
no clue how fundamental logic programming actually is: and now I am implementing a new Prolog, the Prolog everybody has been dreaming
of but couldn't even ask about, and completely for free: besides
shaming you and your bullshit, about what is possible or impossible
to begin with, I do hope you and the whole incorporated gang go out
of business, to put it lightly.

-Julio

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

I only rediscovered a little bit that DCG has
also semi-context, and that when using non-terminals
in semi-contexts, these act like what

was Meta-Grammars in W-Grammar, 1967rCo1968.
W-Grammars with Meta-Grammars were basically
Semi-Thue systems, but one needs to pay attention,

the todays DCG cannot directly implement them:

From natural language processing to Prolog
http://alain.colmerauer.free.fr/

What later came was Q-System, 1968rCo1970, French,
1971rCo1973, Prolog, 1973rCo1976 and Prolog II,
1977rCo1982. An early shift to CLP(X) was dif/2

which already appeared in Prolog II. That todays
Prolog commmunity is clueless about the grammar
and transform aspect is really sad.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

Only morons waste time with regex when they have Prolog!
Its amazing, since Alain Colmerauer was already
juggling with a kind of transducers:

"We present some very general grammars in which
each re-writing rule is of the type: replace such
and such sequence of trees by such and such another
sequence of trees."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225124810

Still the Prolog community is to stupid to
transduce CR, CR LF and LF into LF. Thats quite a
feat. BTW, this should do using DCG semi-contexts:

replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r, 0'\n], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\n], replace.
replace, [X] --> [X], replace.
replace --> [].

Works on my side:

?- replace("foo\rbar\r\nbaz", _L), atom_codes(A, _L).
A = 'foo\nbar\nbaz'

Now optimize it to produce 0'\n as early as
possible and use a state machine, so that you
can implement it low level in your streams.

Have Fun!

Bye

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

I only rediscovered a little bit that DCG has
also semi-context, and that when using non-terminals
in semi-contexts, these act like what

was Meta-Grammars in W-Grammar, 1967rCo1968.
W-Grammars with Meta-Grammars were basically
Semi-Thue systems, but one needs to pay attention,

the todays DCG cannot directly implement them:

From natural language processing to Prolog http://alain.colmerauer.free.fr/alcol/ArchivesTransparents/ChinaApril2011/NatLanguageProlog.pdf

What later came was Q-System, 1968rCo1970, French,
1971rCo1973, Prolog, 1973rCo1976 and Prolog II,
1977rCo1982. An early shift to CLP(X) was dif/2

which already appeared in Prolog II. That todays
Prolog commmunity is clueless about the grammar
and transform aspect is really sad.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

Only morons waste time with regex when they have Prolog!
Its amazing, since Alain Colmerauer was already
juggling with a kind of transducers:

"We present some very general grammars in which
each re-writing rule is of the type: replace such
and such sequence of trees by such and such another
sequence of trees."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225124810

Still the Prolog community is to stupid to
transduce CR, CR LF and LF into LF. Thats quite a
feat. BTW, this should do using DCG semi-contexts:

replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r, 0'\n], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\n], replace.
replace, [X] --> [X], replace.
replace --> [].

Works on my side:

?- replace("foo\rbar\r\nbaz", _L), atom_codes(A, _L).
A = 'foo\nbar\nbaz'

Now optimize it to produce 0'\n as early as
possible and use a state machine, so that you
can implement it low level in your streams.

Have Fun!

Bye

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

I didn't unlock the Metamorphoses Paper yet,
its still behind a paywall for me. But
a Paper about W-Grammars is available.

The Paper about W-Grammars is from
Alain Colmerauers website again.
While a W-Grammar rule of the form:

X |-> Y

Leads mathematically to a rewrite rule:

V,X,W ==> V,Y,W

A DCG Transform of the form:

P,Y --> X,P

Leads mathematically to a rewrite rule:

V,*,X,W ==> V,Y,*,W

Where * is a kind of replacement cursor.
So in DCG Transform there is no comming back
to match and replace a previous position again.

Thats why in my NetFish Transducer, I need
"cascading", basically repeatedly applying
the DCG Transforms by iteration,

until a kind of fixpoint is reached.

Bye

See also:

W-Grammar, Chastellier & Colmerauer (1968) http://alain.colmerauer.free.fr/alcol/ArchivesPublications/Wgrammar/Wgrammar.pdf

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

I only rediscovered a little bit that DCG has
also semi-context, and that when using non-terminals
in semi-contexts, these act like what

was Meta-Grammars in W-Grammar, 1967rCo1968.
W-Grammars with Meta-Grammars were basically
Semi-Thue systems, but one needs to pay attention,

the todays DCG cannot directly implement them:

From natural language processing to Prolog http://alain.colmerauer.free.fr/alcol/ArchivesTransparents/ChinaApril2011/NatLanguageProlog.pdf

What later came was Q-System, 1968rCo1970, French,
1971rCo1973, Prolog, 1973rCo1976 and Prolog II,
1977rCo1982. An early shift to CLP(X) was dif/2

which already appeared in Prolog II. That todays
Prolog commmunity is clueless about the grammar
and transform aspect is really sad.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

Only morons waste time with regex when they have Prolog!
Its amazing, since Alain Colmerauer was already
juggling with a kind of transducers:

"We present some very general grammars in which
each re-writing rule is of the type: replace such
and such sequence of trees by such and such another
sequence of trees."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225124810

Still the Prolog community is to stupid to
transduce CR, CR LF and LF into LF. Thats quite a
feat. BTW, this should do using DCG semi-contexts:

replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r, 0'\n], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\n], replace.
replace, [X] --> [X], replace.
replace --> [].

Works on my side:

?- replace("foo\rbar\r\nbaz", _L), atom_codes(A, _L).
A = 'foo\nbar\nbaz'

Now optimize it to produce 0'\n as early as
possible and use a state machine, so that you
can implement it low level in your streams.

Have Fun!

Bye

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Hi,

What makes the Prolog community probably so
dumbed down, concerning parsing and language theory.
Is possibly the blunder of focusing on

rCLconstraint programmingrCY in the 80s and 90s.
So the Gen-X and later generations has become
clueless about parsing and language theory.

Alain Colmerauer lists in his China talk:

- PrologIA
- ILOG
- COSYTEC

But maybe dumbos like Julio Di Egidio
<julio@diegidio.name> are the exception? The
problem roots deeper. Not only has the Prolog

community become dumbed down, about to
use DCGs in production, it also doesn't trust
a single Prolog system to do it efficiently

to have it used in production, like the realization
of a Prolog system itself. Somehow methods and
tools to realize efficient DCGs in Prolog are

missing. Most DCG attempts that one sees succumb
to some declarative nonsense, creating exponentially
many spurious choice points, you find rarely

somebody mastering the Art.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

I didn't unlock the Metamorphoses Paper yet,
its still behind a paywall for me. But
a Paper about W-Grammars is available.

The Paper about W-Grammars is from
Alain Colmerauers website again.
While a W-Grammar rule of the form:

X |-> Y

Leads mathematically to a rewrite rule:

V,X,W ==> V,Y,W

A DCG Transform of the form:

P,Y --> X,P

Leads mathematically to a rewrite rule:

V,*,X,W ==> V,Y,*,W

Where * is a kind of replacement cursor.
So in DCG Transform there is no comming back
to match and replace a previous position again.

Thats why in my NetFish Transducer, I need
"cascading", basically repeatedly applying
the DCG Transforms by iteration,

until a kind of fixpoint is reached.

Bye

See also:

W-Grammar, Chastellier & Colmerauer (1968) http://alain.colmerauer.free.fr/alcol/ArchivesPublications/Wgrammar/Wgrammar.pdf

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

I only rediscovered a little bit that DCG has
also semi-context, and that when using non-terminals
in semi-contexts, these act like what

was Meta-Grammars in W-Grammar, 1967rCo1968.
W-Grammars with Meta-Grammars were basically
Semi-Thue systems, but one needs to pay attention,

the todays DCG cannot directly implement them:

-aFrom natural language processing to Prolog
http://alain.colmerauer.free.fr/alcol/ArchivesTransparents/ChinaApril2011/NatLanguageProlog.pdf


What later came was Q-System, 1968rCo1970, French,
1971rCo1973, Prolog, 1973rCo1976 and Prolog II,
1977rCo1982. An early shift to CLP(X) was dif/2

which already appeared in Prolog II. That todays
Prolog commmunity is clueless about the grammar
and transform aspect is really sad.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,

Only morons waste time with regex when they have Prolog!
Its amazing, since Alain Colmerauer was already
juggling with a kind of transducers:

"We present some very general grammars in which
each re-writing rule is of the type: replace such
and such sequence of trees by such and such another
sequence of trees."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225124810

Still the Prolog community is to stupid to
transduce CR, CR LF and LF into LF. Thats quite a
feat. BTW, this should do using DCG semi-contexts:

replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r, 0'\n], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\r], replace.
replace, [0'\n] --> [0'\n], replace.
replace, [X] --> [X], replace.
replace --> [].

Works on my side:

?- replace("foo\rbar\r\nbaz", _L), atom_codes(A, _L).
A = 'foo\nbar\nbaz'

Now optimize it to produce 0'\n as early as
possible and use a state machine, so that you
can implement it low level in your streams.

Have Fun!

Bye

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2