Home > Archive > Prolog > May 2007 > Prolog: A Toy For Erudition
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Prolog: A Toy For Erudition
|
|
| Mauro Di Nuzzo 2007-05-02, 8:03 am |
|
There is no doubt that most Prolog elements are BEYOND ME. I knew this.
Other more deludent things surprised me in these years, that I have to
accept now. These are:
1) I have to accept that Prolog stands for PROfessors' LOGie.
2) I have to accept that Prolog user community simply does not exist.
3) I have to accept that comp.lang.prolog is really a place where professors
display their erudition, and students do their homeworks...
All the best to everyone!
Mauro Di Nuzzo
| |
| Jan Wielemaker 2007-05-02, 8:03 am |
| On 2007-05-02, Mauro Di Nuzzo <picorna@inwind.it> wrote:
>
> There is no doubt that most Prolog elements are BEYOND ME. I knew this.
> Other more deludent things surprised me in these years, that I have to
> accept now. These are:
>
> 1) I have to accept that Prolog stands for PROfessors' LOGie.
>
> 2) I have to accept that Prolog user community simply does not exist.
>
> 3) I have to accept that comp.lang.prolog is really a place where professors
> display their erudition, and students do their homeworks...
>
> All the best to everyone!
I fully agree we (= frequent users of this newsgroup) must pay more
attention to the netiquette. As far as I'm concerned, the only people
deserving a rude answer are students who post their homework without
any indication they spend some time thinking about it themselves.
Even then though, it is better to challenge them to think.
Please be polite to each other. It makes the world a better place and
is completely free!
Cheers --- Jan
| |
|
| On Wed, 2 May 2007 11:30:11 +0200, "Mauro Di Nuzzo"
<picorna@inwind.it> wrote:
>
>There is no doubt that most Prolog elements are BEYOND ME. I knew this.
>Other more deludent things surprised me in these years, that I have to
>accept now. These are:
>
>1) I have to accept that Prolog stands for PROfessors' LOGie.
>
>2) I have to accept that Prolog user community simply does not exist.
>
>3) I have to accept that comp.lang.prolog is really a place where professors
>display their erudition, and students do their homeworks...
>
>All the best to everyone!
What have you been drinking today?...
A.L.
| |
| Mauro Di Nuzzo 2007-05-02, 10:03 pm |
| Ah ah. I don't sell it...
I really don't know what I am saying. I am just joking during the breaks
from the job.
"A.L." <fela@2005.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:uu1h33h0pdhcr00sip0381lolc7q6229cm@
4ax.com...
> On Wed, 2 May 2007 11:30:11 +0200, "Mauro Di Nuzzo"
> <picorna@inwind.it> wrote:
>
>
> What have you been drinking today?...
>
> A.L.
| |
| citizen 2007-05-02, 10:03 pm |
| Mauro Di Nuzzo wrote:
> There is no doubt that most Prolog elements are BEYOND ME. I knew this.
> Other more deludent things surprised me in these years, that I have to
> accept now. These are:
>
> 1) I have to accept that Prolog stands for PROfessors' LOGie.
>
> 2) I have to accept that Prolog user community simply does not exist.
>
> 3) I have to accept that comp.lang.prolog is really a place where professors
> display their erudition, and students do their homeworks...
>
> All the best to everyone!
>
>
> Mauro Di Nuzzo
>
>
Spot on, Mauro, and tres droll.
I often think it might be better if this newsgroup were called
'comp.lang.declarative.prolog.iso'.
But please don't leave!
comp.lang.prolog is also a battleground and our side needs all the
reinforcements we can get.
I began the odyssey that eventually led me to this newsgroup long
ago, as a biomedical applications Fortran programmer with some graduate
training in biostatistic and epidemiology, at a time when applications
programming was entirely ad hoc, and it was out of that concrete
experience -- a slow, repetitive, laborious process of faithfully
translating substantive biomedical questions and observations into
computer programs and "input data" and faithfully translating the output
back into substantive terms -- that the perspective which became second
nature to me and remains to this day the perspective I try to uphold in
this newsgroup was born:
Maximize end-user autonomy!
-- by abolishing the necessity of translating the description of a
problem or a question about that problem from substantive terms into
anything else at all!
So, for me, ISO Prolog is only a step in that direction; it is not
only not the end of the story, it is not even the end of the beginning
of the story.
The health of the biosphere is paramount.
Ciao,
billh
| |
| Mauro Di Nuzzo 2007-05-03, 10:02 pm |
| I am very grateful to you for the kindness of your reply.
You told your story... this is mine:
Informatics and Prolog are not my occupation. I just like Prolog.
Two years ago I searched the web extensively for a good Prolog
documentation, but I failed to find it (just sparse and incomprensible
material for newbies).
So I decided to build a site just putting online some contents (without
inventing nothing, however).
I asked help to this newsgroup, but... no way. Things must remain as they
are.
So I uploaded some very very very simple project of my own, mainly to
receive attention from beginners. Nothing.
On the contrary, people like Bart Demoen used their criticism to stress the
"triviality" of my Prolog scripts (that was obvious).
THEY NEVER GAVE ME ONE (1) SUGGESTION!!
What can I say? Things must remain as they are!
Regards,
Ciao
Mauro
"citizen" <americans@everywhere.usa> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:7F5_h.1$mR2.0@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
> Mauro Di Nuzzo wrote:
>
> Spot on, Mauro, and tres droll.
>
> I often think it might be better if this newsgroup were called
> 'comp.lang.declarative.prolog.iso'.
>
> But please don't leave!
>
> comp.lang.prolog is also a battleground and our side needs all the
> reinforcements we can get.
>
> I began the odyssey that eventually led me to this newsgroup long ago,
> as a biomedical applications Fortran programmer with some graduate
> training in biostatistic and epidemiology, at a time when applications
> programming was entirely ad hoc, and it was out of that concrete
> experience -- a slow, repetitive, laborious process of faithfully
> translating substantive biomedical questions and observations into
> computer programs and "input data" and faithfully translating the output
> back into substantive terms -- that the perspective which became second
> nature to me and remains to this day the perspective I try to uphold in
> this newsgroup was born:
>
> Maximize end-user autonomy!
>
> -- by abolishing the necessity of translating the description of a problem
> or a question about that problem from substantive terms into anything else
> at all!
>
> So, for me, ISO Prolog is only a step in that direction; it is not only
> not the end of the story, it is not even the end of the beginning of the
> story.
>
> The health of the biosphere is paramount.
>
> Ciao,
>
> billh
| |
|
| On Thu, 3 May 2007 21:30:56 +0200, "Mauro Di Nuzzo"
<picorna@inwind.it> wrote:
>I am very grateful to you for the kindness of your reply.
>
>You told your story... this is mine:
>Informatics and Prolog are not my occupation. I just like Prolog.
>Two years ago I searched the web extensively for a good Prolog
>documentation, but I failed to find it (just sparse and incomprensible
>material for newbies).
What is "good" and what is "documentation"?.. You are looking for
"dicumentation" (for specific Prolog implementation), tutorial,
textbook, advanced text or text about Prolog applications? Or what?...
Knowing what is available on the marked and Internet, I don't
understand your notion of "good". In my opinion, there are GOOD etxts
for everybody, from novice to advanced yser. maybe you don't know what
you want?...
>So I decided to build a site just putting online some contents (without
>inventing nothing, however).
>I asked help to this newsgroup, but... no way. Things must remain as they
>are.
>So I uploaded some very very very simple project of my own, mainly to
>receive attention from beginners. Nothing.
Well, not exactly "nothing". As I recall, we has some discussion about
your object packgage. What more you are expecting?
The rest of stuff posetd on jutr page is not finished and/or addresses
problems that have been alrady solved (your OO packege also belongs to
thsi category)
>On the contrary, people like Bart Demoen used their criticism to stress the
>"triviality" of my Prolog scripts (that was obvious).
Maybe they are trivial? However, your OO packaeg is elegant.
>THEY NEVER GAVE ME ONE (1) SUGGESTION!!
>What can I say? Things must remain as they are!
Suggestion about what?...
A.L.
| |
|
| On Wed, 02 May 2007 12:31:01 -0700, citizen <americans@everywhere.usa>
wrote:
> I began the odyssey that eventually led me to this newsgroup long
>ago, as a biomedical applications Fortran programmer with some graduate
>training in biostatistic and epidemiology, at a time when applications
>programming was entirely ad hoc, and it was out of that concrete
>experience -- a slow, repetitive, laborious process of faithfully
>translating substantive biomedical questions and observations into
>computer programs and "input data" and faithfully translating the output
>back into substantive terms -- that the perspective which became second
>nature to me and remains to this day the perspective I try to uphold in
>this newsgroup was born:
>
> Maximize end-user autonomy!
>
>-- by abolishing the necessity of translating the description of a
>problem or a question about that problem from substantive terms into
>anything else at all!
>
> So, for me, ISO Prolog is only a step in that direction; it is not
>only not the end of the story, it is not even the end of the beginning
>of the story.
>
Very good text. Sophisticated English. But could you explain what you
wanted to say?... You know, one, maximum 2 sentences...
A.L.
| |
| Neng-Fa Zhou 2007-05-04, 7:04 pm |
| > On the contrary, people like Bart Demoen used their criticism to stress
> the "triviality" of my Prolog scripts (that was obvious).
Bart Demoen did give a lot of help to readers of this group. His problem is
that he does 100 good things and then make one terrible remark, and because
of this he is sometimes perceived as worse than a bad guy. Maybe he needs to
be taught to behave consistently:-)
--nf
| |
|
| On Fri, 4 May 2007 16:52:16 -0400, "Neng-Fa Zhou" <nzhou@acm.org>
wrote:
>
>Bart Demoen did give a lot of help to readers of this group. His problem is
>that he does 100 good things and then make one terrible remark,
In most cases this one terrible remark is well justified...
A.L.
| |
|
| On Fri, 4 May 2007 16:52:16 -0400, "Neng-Fa Zhou" <nzhou@acm.org>
wrote:
>
>Bart Demoen did give a lot of help to readers of this group. His problem is
>that he does 100 good things and then make one terrible remark, and because
>of this he is sometimes perceived as worse than a bad guy. Maybe he needs to
>be taught to behave consistently:-)
>
Taught by whom?.. You?...
A.L.
>
| |
| Mauro Di Nuzzo 2007-05-05, 7:04 pm |
| Dear A.L. I just uploaded what I meant for the STRUCTURE of a good (well,
acceptable) documentation.
PLEASE NOTE: I deal often with ideas and potential of things, so I will not
accept critics about the completeness of the contents you will see online. I
have not enough time to work on a Prolog project for real.
Take a look at http://www.prologonlinereference.org/reference.psp
In order to anticipate you: Yes, "good" for beginners!
About the other question, I have a great respect of him. Though, if I were
him, I just smiled.
Regards,
Mauro Di Nuzzo
"A.L." <fela@2005.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:a4ik33dbm4k4fo6m5hkid57d0hjioaulmk@
4ax.com...
> On Thu, 3 May 2007 21:30:56 +0200, "Mauro Di Nuzzo"
> <picorna@inwind.it> wrote:
>
>
> What is "good" and what is "documentation"?.. You are looking for
> "dicumentation" (for specific Prolog implementation), tutorial,
> textbook, advanced text or text about Prolog applications? Or what?...
>
> Knowing what is available on the marked and Internet, I don't
> understand your notion of "good". In my opinion, there are GOOD etxts
> for everybody, from novice to advanced yser. maybe you don't know what
> you want?...
>
>
> Well, not exactly "nothing". As I recall, we has some discussion about
> your object packgage. What more you are expecting?
>
> The rest of stuff posetd on jutr page is not finished and/or addresses
> problems that have been alrady solved (your OO packege also belongs to
> thsi category)
>
>
> Maybe they are trivial? However, your OO packaeg is elegant.
>
>
> Suggestion about what?...
>
> A.L.
| |
| Mauro Di Nuzzo 2007-05-05, 7:04 pm |
| Surely I read here (comp.lang.prolog) many quarrels in the past.
This says much about a group.
Sometimes, between a "call for papers" and an insult, occasions to speak
about Prolog came after students asked suggestions for their homeworks.
It is obvious to me that most posts have to come from beginners.
Since it is now necessary, I want to say, finally: I AM A BEGINNER.
I exhort people like me to do the same declaration ;)
Cheers,
Mauro
"Neng-Fa Zhou" <nzhou@acm.org> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:02N_h.24$QO6.5@newsfe12.lga...
>
> Bart Demoen did give a lot of help to readers of this group. His problem
> is that he does 100 good things and then make one terrible remark, and
> because of this he is sometimes perceived as worse than a bad guy. Maybe
> he needs to be taught to behave consistently:-)
>
> --nf
>
| |
|
| On Sat, 5 May 2007 19:34:50 +0200, "Mauro Di Nuzzo"
<picorna@inwind.it> wrote:
>Dear A.L. I just uploaded what I meant for the STRUCTURE of a good (well,
>acceptable) documentation.
Fine. You are free to fill the gaps. But remember... Your "good"
structure maybe is not mine "good" structure. Anyway, I think that
all this is marginal. If you want to write your own book, do this.
There will be One More Prolog Book on the market. But don't expect
that The World with say "Aaaahhhhh..." and join you in this effort.
>
>PLEASE NOTE: I deal often with ideas and potential of things, so I will not
>accept critics about the completeness of the contents you will see online. I
>have not enough time to work on a Prolog project for real.
>
Means, others should complete the job you drafted?...
>Take a look at http://www.prologonlinereference.org/reference.psp
>
Take printed SICStus manual. It is in pdf format. Go to "predicate
index" section. All predicates listed. All are hyperlinked. Click on
predicate, the relevant definition page is displayed. What is wrong
with this?...
>In order to anticipate you: Yes, "good" for beginners!
>
There are quite good texts for beginners available. Some published
quite recently, such as "Learn Prolog Now" by Patrick Blackburn, Johan
Bos and Kristina Striegnitz. Text was available on the Internet for
years before published in the form of a book. Excellent text, good for
beginners.
There is "Adventure with Prolog" from Amzi. What is wrong with
this?...
The attitude "all books are bad, mine would be better but I have no
time to write" is not very constructive.
>About the other question, I have a great respect of him. Though, if I were
>him, I just smiled.
.... instead of responding?...
A.L.
| |
|
| On Sat, 5 May 2007 20:02:37 +0200, "Mauro Di Nuzzo"
<picorna@inwind.it> wrote:
>Surely I read here (comp.lang.prolog) many quarrels in the past.
>This says much about a group.
>Sometimes, between a "call for papers" and an insult, occasions to speak
>about Prolog came after students asked suggestions for their homeworks.
>It is obvious to me that most posts have to come from beginners.
>Since it is now necessary, I want to say, finally: I AM A BEGINNER.
>
>I exhort people like me to do the same declaration ;)
I am familiar with Prolog since 196* when it arrived on deck of
punched cards, written in Fortran IV. During last 4 years I am using
Prolog rather extensively for commercial developments. However, when
conforonted with Bart Demoen, Matts Carlson and others, I must say: I
AM A BEGINNER. And actually I am learning a lot reading this group.
A.L.
P.S. Why did you remove your oop package from your web site?...
| |
| Mauro Di Nuzzo 2007-05-05, 7:04 pm |
| Yeah, perhaps I am a little lazy, but I like a sort of stimulated-e-learning
rather than a book.
However, yes, I have no time, but I built a site about Prolog. Yes, almost
incomplete, but I did. And I will maintain it (my intentions are clearly
written on it). Little by little. I have to work.
M
"A.L." <fela@2005.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:50hp33tlvnmrh8ov7mh9vfhvl1fd0c0jpb@
4ax.com...
> On Sat, 5 May 2007 19:34:50 +0200, "Mauro Di Nuzzo"
> <picorna@inwind.it> wrote:
>
>
> Fine. You are free to fill the gaps. But remember... Your "good"
> structure maybe is not mine "good" structure. Anyway, I think that
> all this is marginal. If you want to write your own book, do this.
> There will be One More Prolog Book on the market. But don't expect
> that The World with say "Aaaahhhhh..." and join you in this effort.
>
> Means, others should complete the job you drafted?...
>
>
> Take printed SICStus manual. It is in pdf format. Go to "predicate
> index" section. All predicates listed. All are hyperlinked. Click on
> predicate, the relevant definition page is displayed. What is wrong
> with this?...
>
>
> There are quite good texts for beginners available. Some published
> quite recently, such as "Learn Prolog Now" by Patrick Blackburn, Johan
> Bos and Kristina Striegnitz. Text was available on the Internet for
> years before published in the form of a book. Excellent text, good for
> beginners.
>
> There is "Adventure with Prolog" from Amzi. What is wrong with
> this?...
>
> The attitude "all books are bad, mine would be better but I have no
> time to write" is not very constructive.
>
>
> ... instead of responding?...
>
> A.L.
| |
| Mauro Di Nuzzo 2007-05-05, 7:04 pm |
| Do not exaggerate. One that use Prolog extensively for commercial
developments cannot be a beginner.
Consider, for example, physicists. Some like to do experiments. Others are
theoretician. The former will not tell never to you, but there are many
things they simply do not know (among what the latter know very well).
I hope my point is clear.
M
"A.L." <fela@2005.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:4hip33dm0biho9lrctqmdadiu7ko4bnvnt@
4ax.com...
> On Sat, 5 May 2007 20:02:37 +0200, "Mauro Di Nuzzo"
> <picorna@inwind.it> wrote:
>
>
> I am familiar with Prolog since 196* when it arrived on deck of
> punched cards, written in Fortran IV. During last 4 years I am using
> Prolog rather extensively for commercial developments. However, when
> conforonted with Bart Demoen, Matts Carlson and others, I must say: I
> AM A BEGINNER. And actually I am learning a lot reading this group.
>
> A.L.
>
> P.S. Why did you remove your oop package from your web site?...
| |
| Mauro Di Nuzzo 2007-05-05, 7:04 pm |
| I removed both OOP and PSP because, if I will find a little time, I will put
them online in a better condition.
Otherwise, I will keep them in my pc for hard-drive paleontologists.
In this respect, I have to admit that this discussion changed something (the
download section ;)
M
"A.L." <fela@2005.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:4hip33dm0biho9lrctqmdadiu7ko4bnvnt@
4ax.com...
> On Sat, 5 May 2007 20:02:37 +0200, "Mauro Di Nuzzo"
> <picorna@inwind.it> wrote:
>
>
> I am familiar with Prolog since 196* when it arrived on deck of
> punched cards, written in Fortran IV. During last 4 years I am using
> Prolog rather extensively for commercial developments. However, when
> conforonted with Bart Demoen, Matts Carlson and others, I must say: I
> AM A BEGINNER. And actually I am learning a lot reading this group.
>
> A.L.
>
> P.S. Why did you remove your oop package from your web site?...
| |
|
| On Sat, 5 May 2007 20:42:41 +0200, "Mauro Di Nuzzo"
<picorna@inwind.it> wrote:
>I removed both OOP and PSP because, if I will find a little time, I will put
>them online in a better condition.
>Otherwise, I will keep them in my pc for hard-drive paleontologists.
>In this respect, I have to admit that this discussion changed something (the
>download section ;)
>
Wrong. OOP was (and is) very smart piece of software, and people can
learn quite a lot studying how it it done. I believe that removing OOP
is sort of disservice for the community...
A.L.
| |
|
| On Sat, 5 May 2007 20:37:41 +0200, "Mauro Di Nuzzo"
<picorna@inwind.it> wrote:
>Do not exaggerate. One that use Prolog extensively for commercial
>developments cannot be a beginner.
I think that it is much more important to know what you DON'T know
than what you DO know. Maybe the notion of "beginner" needs more
detailed definition, but I can assure you that there are whole areas
of Prolog internals and externals that I have never touched and/or I
don't know sufficiently well.
A.L.
| |
| Mauro Di Nuzzo 2007-05-05, 7:04 pm |
|
> I think that it is much more important to know what you DON'T know
> than what you DO know.
How is it possible to know something if one does not know it?
Do you mean "knowing that one does not know" (phylosophical)?
If so, this seems poetic, but little more.
In practice, if you know many things probably you know them not so deeply.
On the contrary, if you "stick a subject for a longer while, you might
achieve great things" (citation ;).
Every person of science knows well this hard-to-solve issue.
> Maybe the notion of "beginner" needs more
> detailed definition, but I can assure you that there are whole areas
> of Prolog internals and externals that I have never touched and/or I
> don't know sufficiently well.
Well, me too. Fortunately, we have time to learn. And we know it.
But this not imply that we have to do it. We can decide with consciuosness
to not learn it. And it is not a trivial assumption that simply "we do not
know it".
M
| |
| Mauro Di Nuzzo 2007-05-05, 7:04 pm |
|
>
> Wrong. OOP was (and is) very smart piece of software, and people can
> learn quite a lot studying how it it done. I believe that removing OOP
> is sort of disservice for the community...
>
Thank you. Maybe...
It is worth noting that I am now trying to identify that "community".
M
|
|
|
|
|