Newsgroups: misc.education,comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.prolog
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!cornellcs!travelers.mail.cornell.edu!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!munnari.oz.au!cs.mu.OZ.AU!munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU!winikoff
From: winikoff@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Michael David WINIKOFF)
Subject: Re: Wanted: programming language for 9 yr old
Message-ID: <9528412.25596@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
Sender: news@cs.mu.OZ.AU (CS-Usenet)
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
References: <43v5qb$sb8@blackice.winternet.com> <44da7v$d0f@stills.pubnix.net> <44lmqs$pap@news.asu.edu> <44rapn$1cr@dsinc.myxa.com> <44rfv4$1qnq@b.stat.purdue.edu> <44rkqq$6ic@dsinc.myxa.com> <9528211.10844@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <45b8fo$e3b@dsinc.myxa.com>
Distribution: inet
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 02:22:39 GMT
Lines: 26
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.misc:23374 comp.lang.prolog:14003

rgb@banjo.dsi.com (Randy Brown) writes:

>Ok, but I think prolog's operational semantics is much more difficult
>to understand than its logical one.  I understood prolog's logical
>symantics fairly quickly (I was a math major) but it took me considerably
>longer to understand the operational semantics enough to know what
>the cut operation does.

Yes ... Prolog does have problems, two solutions:
(1) Don't do anything too complex (a lot of stuff can be done in the 
	pure subset of prolog)
(2) Use a better logic programming language. Of which there are a number.
	I'll mention Godel and point to the comp.lang.prolog FAQ

>But why would you program in one without it?  Logic programming are

Because they're expressive high level languages.
Why use, say, LISP rather than C?

>quite beatiful in some ways, but I don't see how the beauty is there
>without the declarative semantics.

Michael
winikoff@cs.mu.oz.au

>	-Randy
