Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!udel!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!dcf
From: dcf@netcom.com (Don Ferguson)
Subject: Re: Why hasn't Prolog Taken over the World?
Message-ID: <dcfCzI6wB.9pH@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <3a6lf4$mk5@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <3aal5c$b4d@ra.nrl.navy.mil> <citrin-1511941431140001@ecemac-citrin.colorado.edu> <3ai0ps$rmq@beta.qmw.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 1994 07:16:59 GMT
Lines: 28

The question I have is whether it is too late for Prolog. Is the language
dead, or just resting?  And if it's not dead, then what can be done to
breathe some life into it?

I'm afraid that features such as multi-threading, better modules, constraints,
etc. won't make a difference.  If people believe that Prolog is dog meat, then
new and improved dog meat isn't going to make 'em salivate.  The same is
true for standardized dog meat.  Standardization comes roughly 8 years too
late.

Nevertheless, in a world where Richard Nixon can become an elder statesman,
and where Marion Barry can be re-elected, anything is possible (for non-u.s.
readers, Marion Barry is the crack smoking mayor of Washington D.C., and
Richard Nixon was a notorious criminal).

Perhaps pockets of Prolog fanatics will survive the current C++ plague.
Perhaps they will rise from the rubble, emerging from the dank corners 
and corridors of research labs around the world, and Prolog will be
recognized as the true savior of Computer Science.

Man, I gotta lay off those drugs.







