XPost: sci.math
From: janburse@fastmail.fm
Hi,
Its their take of Logical variable, which
might not be the same as a Prolog logical variable.
------------------ cut here ----------------
2.1 Logical variables and equations
A program executes by solving its equations, using
the process of unification. For example,
∃x y z. x = ; x= <2,z>; y
is solved by unifying x with and with <2, z>;
that in turn unifies with <2, z>, which unifies
y with 2 and z with 3. Finally, 2 is returned as the
result. Note carefully that, as in any declarative
language, logical variables are not mutable; a logical
variable stands for a single, immutable value.
We use "∃" to bring a fresh logical variable into
scope, because we really mean "there exists an x
such that .... "
------------------ cut here ----------------
Of course the above is utter nonsense, written
from somebody who doesn't know what a Prolog logical
variable is, shifting in the same sentence from
the attribution of "immutable" of a variable, to
the attribution of "immutable" of the value
of a variable. This is quite hillarious.
Bye
Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> Its from this paper:
>
> The Verse Calculus:a Core Calculus for Functional Logic Programming
> SIMON PEYTON JONES, Epic Games, United Kingdom
> GUY STEELE, Oracle Labs, USA
> https://simon.peytonjones.org/assets/pdfs/verse-March23.pdf
>
> Don't blame me for what they write.
> But mostlikely your eruption is just from
> a clueless Nazi Retard, namely the paid
>
> troll you are, getting money from Putin.
>
> Bye
>
> Franz Sneijders schrieb:
>> Mild Shock wrote:
>>
>>> We use “∃” to bring a fresh logical variable into scope, because we
>>> really mean “there exists an x such that ···.”
>>
>> idiot, there is no any x over there. And it doesn't need to be a
>> variable,
>> a constant suffices.
>>
>
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
