Re: dynamic programming

> > if I add a new clause from a module x to a dynamic module, let say:
> > 
> > assert((a:b:-c)).
> 
> 1#. You should be writing assert(a:(b :- c)).
> 2#. Some people prefer a:assert((b :- c)).

Thank you for your comment... 1# I had tried out something similar, it might have been my mistake, but now it works!

#2. The problem is, that the module name is a parameter.
Congratulations for the implementor! X=a, X:assert((b:-c)) works!

> > In my opinion the implementation of assert should notice, if right hand calls are made to the same module where the clause is placed (in our case 'a'),
> You are asking for the impossible.  For one thing,
> when you write assert((a:b :- c)) you are *specifying* that
> the right hand calls are *NOT* made to the module 'a'.

I am another opinion: I expect "assert((H:-B)), clause(H,B)" to work invariably under each circumstances. Just because of your explanation below: if I dont specify module prefix for call c, than it should take the default one, that is "a"...

> 
> > and optimize eventual chained ":" operators out...
> 
> If any Prolog system sees a:x:c as a goal, it is at liberty
> to generate whatever executable code it likes as like as it
> has the same effect, just as seeing X is 1 + 1 it is allowed
> to compile code for X is 2.

But again thankx for the comments! 

yours:

-- 
Kilián Imre/Univ.Pécs Informatics
<[email protected]>