Re: pengines extension to html_requires

On 02/09/2014 03:01 PM, Torbjörn Lager wrote:
> Ok, but note also that on the JS side, you can _always_ leave out the
> options argument and let it default to {}, since this is how JS was
> designed in the first place. One could argue that it would be nice to
> keep as much as symmetry as possible between the JS methods and the
> Prolog predicates.

The interfaces don't meet each other much.  In a web page you can
have embedded Prolog, but that will most often not call any pengine
predicate and if it does mostly pengine_debug, pengine_input,
pengine_output or pengine_rpc.  I specifically want to keep the
low-arity versions here.

> Having said that, since you are the maintainer of the whole of
> SWI-Prolog and its libraries, I think you should have the final say

That is my weakness :-(  You have convinced me that pengines are
a great idea.  Only, your implementation was a bit flawed where it
came to resource management and security ...  Guess that is the
role of a Prof vs. a PhD :-)

> here. I'm happy either way. We can always add predicates without
> options if we find that people want them.

I'll throw them out.  It is easy to put them back in, but hard to
throw them out later.

	Cheers --- Jan