Re: support for extended library

On 06/08/2011 04:19 PM, Alois Schloegl wrote:
> A colleague of mine wants to have SICStus Prolog. When I mentioned free
> alternatives like gprolog and swi-prolog, his reasoning for using
> SICStus Prolog over gprolog/swi-prolog is, that
>
> "Sicstus has a strong library support. For example: Library for list
> operations:
>
> 1. Sicstus:
> http://www.sics.se/sicstus/docs/latest4/html/sicstus.html/lib_002dlists.html
>
>
> 2. SWI:
> http://www.swi-prolog.org/pldoc/doc_for?object=section%282,%27A.12%27,swi%28%27/doc/Manual/lists.html%27%29%29
>
>
> 3. GProlog
> http://www.swi-prolog.org/pldoc/doc_for?object=section%282,%27A.12%27,swi%28%27/doc/Manual/lists.html%27%29%29

You probably wanted another web address here :-)

> Therefore, I'm wondering whether there are resources out there that
> address this issue.

There is no standard for library(lists).  As a result, some of the stuff 
is in different places.  E.g., include/3 is in library(apply),
transpose/2 is (not that I like it), in library(clpfd), etc.  Richard
O'Keefe proposed a new library structure [1].  This document surely
acts as a guideline for developers when making a decision about changes,
but it is not yet widely adopted.

I assume that if there is sufficient demand, people will complain
and submit additions to the list library.

On a broader scope, I think both the SICStus and SWI-Prolog libraries
cover a lot of ground.  Both have comprehensive and well
developed areas and weaker spots.  Overall, my guess would be that the 
SICStus libraries are stronger manipulating Prolog terms and the SWI
libraries are stronger in communication and reading/writing external
file formats.

	Cheers --- Jan

[1] http://www.cs.otago.ac.nz/staffpriv/ok/pllib.htm