Ha Ha, AI is going servers:

HumanE AI Net Virtual Lab - Unimore, 2021 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvcK5V48jx0

Whats the result, some payed service?
Dogelog will be client, and payed through

dogecoins of course. Just joking.

Mostowski Collapse schrieb:

Dear All,

Ok a simple mark and sweep works, and
a simple trigger mechanism does the job:

ANN: Dogelog Runtime, Prolog to the Moon (2021) https://qiita.com/j4n_bur53/items/17f86429745426bd14fd

And we are 10x times faster than TauProlog! LoL

Best Regards

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

BTW: Dogelog got its first official manual: https://github.com/jburse/dogelog-moon/blob/main/manual/package.pdf

Enjoy!

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Sonntag, 13. Juni 2021 um 01:59:38 UTC+2:

Hi

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn was thinking hard and then lamented:

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schrieb am Samstag, 12. Juni 2021 um 22:24:13 UTC+2:

Also, you cannot expect everyone to know what you are advertising, or visit the Web site (if any) to find out. So one can reasonably expect that you first say what it *is* that you are advertising.

It is what it is, and it was already explained in this thread.
Its the same thing like TauProlog. So guess what it is?

LoL

Bye
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Sonntag, 2. Mai 2021 um 23:05:58 UTC+2:

Dear All,

Ok a simple mark and sweep works, and
a simple trigger mechanism does the job:

ANN: Dogelog Runtime, Prolog to the Moon (2021) https://qiita.com/j4n_bur53/items/17f86429745426bd14fd

And we are 10x times faster than TauProlog! LoL

Best Regards

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn was thinking hard and then lamented:

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schrieb am Samstag, 12. Juni 2021 um 22:24:13 UTC+2:

Also, you cannot expect everyone to know what you are advertising, or visit the Web site (if any) to find out. So one can reasonably expect that you first say what it *is* that you are advertising.

It is what it is, and it was already explained in this thread.
Its the same thing like TauProlog. So guess what it is?

LoL

Bye

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Sonntag, 2. Mai 2021 um 23:05:58 UTC+2:

Dear All,

Ok a simple mark and sweep works, and
a simple trigger mechanism does the job:

ANN: Dogelog Runtime, Prolog to the Moon (2021) https://qiita.com/j4n_bur53/items/17f86429745426bd14fd

And we are 10x times faster than TauProlog! LoL

Best Regards

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Preview: Dogelog can be embedded in stackoverflow. (Jekejeke) https://stackoverflow.com/a/67990574/502187

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Sonntag, 13. Juni 2021 um 02:01:46 UTC+2:

BTW: Dogelog got its first official manual: https://github.com/jburse/dogelog-moon/blob/main/manual/package.pdf

Enjoy!
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Sonntag, 13. Juni 2021 um 01:59:38 UTC+2:

Hi

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn was thinking hard and then lamented:

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schrieb am Samstag, 12. Juni 2021 um 22:24:13 UTC+2:

Also, you cannot expect everyone to know what you are advertising, or visit
the Web site (if any) to find out. So one can reasonably expect that you first say what it *is* that you are advertising.

It is what it is, and it was already explained in this thread.
Its the same thing like TauProlog. So guess what it is?

LoL

Bye
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Sonntag, 2. Mai 2021 um 23:05:58 UTC+2:

Dear All,

Ok a simple mark and sweep works, and
a simple trigger mechanism does the job:

ANN: Dogelog Runtime, Prolog to the Moon (2021) https://qiita.com/j4n_bur53/items/17f86429745426bd14fd

And we are 10x times faster than TauProlog! LoL

Best Regards

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Since (->)/2 inlining works, Dogelog is now old enough for its
own group. Dogelog got its own Facebook Group!

https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

Mostowski Collapse schrieb:

Preview: Dogelog can be embedded in stackoverflow. (Jekejeke) https://stackoverflow.com/a/67990574/502187

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Sonntag, 2. Mai 2021 um 23:05:58 UTC+2:

Dear All,

Ok a simple mark and sweep works, and
a simple trigger mechanism does the job:

ANN: Dogelog Runtime, Prolog to the Moon (2021) https://qiita.com/j4n_bur53/items/17f86429745426bd14fd

And we are 10x times faster than TauProlog! LoL

Best Regards

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The new Android Store/Emulator inside Windows 11
is probably an anachronism, flogging a dead horse.

It seems JavaScript is everywhere, even Artificial
Intelligence becomes cookie cutting:

I built a Distance Matrix Routing App in React! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43jfFU4FJZo

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Mittwoch, 23. Juni 2021 um 14:57:55 UTC+2:

Since (->)/2 inlining works, Dogelog is now old enough for its
own group. Dogelog got its own Facebook Group!

https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

Mostowski Collapse schrieb:

Preview: Dogelog can be embedded in stackoverflow. (Jekejeke) https://stackoverflow.com/a/67990574/502187

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Sonntag, 2. Mai 2021 um 23:05:58 UTC+2:

Dear All,

Ok a simple mark and sweep works, and
a simple trigger mechanism does the job:

ANN: Dogelog Runtime, Prolog to the Moon (2021) https://qiita.com/j4n_bur53/items/17f86429745426bd14fd

And we are 10x times faster than TauProlog! LoL

Best Regards

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Something like this might do the job in the future,
and replace Android and iOS apps. Dunno?

https://www.w3.org/TR/miniapp-lifecycle/

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Freitag, 25. Juni 2021 um 13:01:01 UTC+2:

The new Android Store/Emulator inside Windows 11
is probably an anachronism, flogging a dead horse.

It seems JavaScript is everywhere, even Artificial
Intelligence becomes cookie cutting:

I built a Distance Matrix Routing App in React! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43jfFU4FJZo
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Mittwoch, 23. Juni 2021 um 14:57:55 UTC+2:

Since (->)/2 inlining works, Dogelog is now old enough for its
own group. Dogelog got its own Facebook Group!

https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

Mostowski Collapse schrieb:

Preview: Dogelog can be embedded in stackoverflow. (Jekejeke) https://stackoverflow.com/a/67990574/502187

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Sonntag, 2. Mai 2021 um 23:05:58 UTC+2:

Dear All,

Ok a simple mark and sweep works, and
a simple trigger mechanism does the job:

ANN: Dogelog Runtime, Prolog to the Moon (2021) https://qiita.com/j4n_bur53/items/17f86429745426bd14fd

And we are 10x times faster than TauProlog! LoL

Best Regards

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Noice! One less problem:
**Bringing Unicode to Prolog (Dogelog Runtime)**

Was checking out what Logtalk does. They have Prolog text here:

https://github.com/LogtalkDotOrg/logtalk3/tree/master/library/unicode_data/unicode_categories

These Prolog texts contain facts like:

unicode_category_(0x00AD, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x0600, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x0601, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x0602, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x0603, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x0604, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x06DD, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x070F, 'Cf').
Etc...

This might be feasible standalone, but if we want to deliver JavaScript files over the wire into the browser, its possibly not a good idea to have
facts with 1114111 entries. So we made a little Unicode compressor:

compression took 109 ms

pool.size()*PARA_SIZE= 8384
pool2.size()*BLOCK_SIZE= 3072
MAX_BLOCK= 1088
Total= 12544

The compression ratio is 1%. The 1114111 entries boil down
to 12544 entries. See also:

Preview: Unicode general categories Prolog API. (Jekejeke) https://gist.github.com/jburse/03c9b3cec528288d5c29c3d8bbb986c2#gistcomment-3808667

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

More progress in the Unicode domain, so that we can
leave Unicode behind and move to other things. Unicode
code points, that they can represent a numeric value.

Some exotic and not so exotic examples are seen here:

unicode_numerical_value(0x0D75, 0.75, 3/4). % No MALAYALAM FRACTION THREE QUARTERS
unicode_numerical_value(0x096C, 6.0, 6). % Nd DEVANAGARI DIGIT SIX unicode_numerical_value(0x216E, 500.0, 500). % Nl ROMAN NUMERAL FIVE HUNDRED

We decided to replicate the Character.digit() API from Java. This API
only returns numeric values that are integer and that are between 0 and 35. Otherwise the API returns -1.

Can we compress like before? Yes!

Without Numeric With Numeric
pool.size()*PARA_SIZE= 8384 8416
pool2.size()*BLOCK_SIZE= 3072 3072
MAX_BLOCK= 1088 1088
Total= 12544 12576

See also:

Preview: Unicode numeric values Prolog API. (Jekejeke) https://twitter.com/dogelogch/status/1414493706124767237

Or if you are not on Twitter, but on Facebook:

Preview: Unicode numeric values Prolog API. (Jekejeke) https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Sonntag, 11. Juli 2021 um 01:50:25 UTC+2:

Noice! One less problem:
**Bringing Unicode to Prolog (Dogelog Runtime)**

Was checking out what Logtalk does. They have Prolog text here:

https://github.com/LogtalkDotOrg/logtalk3/tree/master/library/unicode_data/unicode_categories

These Prolog texts contain facts like:

unicode_category_(0x00AD, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x0600, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x0601, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x0602, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x0603, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x0604, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x06DD, 'Cf').
unicode_category_(0x070F, 'Cf').
Etc...

This might be feasible standalone, but if we want to deliver JavaScript files over the wire into the browser, its possibly not a good idea to have
facts with 1114111 entries. So we made a little Unicode compressor:

compression took 109 ms

pool.size()*PARA_SIZE= 8384
pool2.size()*BLOCK_SIZE= 3072
MAX_BLOCK= 1088
Total= 12544

The compression ratio is 1%. The 1114111 entries boil down
to 12544 entries. See also:

Preview: Unicode general categories Prolog API. (Jekejeke) https://gist.github.com/jburse/03c9b3cec528288d5c29c3d8bbb986c2#gistcomment-3808667

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Dear All,

Teaching Dogelog more tricks. From now on you don't
need to use (:-)/2 together with write/1 and friends.
There is a new (?-)/2, and you can for example input:

append([], X, X).
append([X|Y], Z, [X|T]) :- append(Y, Z, T).

?- limit(2,offset(1,append(X, Y, [1,2,3]))).

It will then automatically show:

X = [1], Y = [2, 3];
X = [1, 2], Y = [3]

See also:

Preview: Unattended Dogelog query answers. (Jekejeke) https://twitter.com/dogelogch/status/1422206395798204422

Preview: Unattended Dogelog query answers. (Jekejeke) https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

Have Fun!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

It seems JavaScript gives us all we need. We use two different
file name normalization depending on whether the Dogelog
runtime runs inside a browser or from within node.js:

- Inside node.js:
We perform file name normalization as follows:

res = fs.realpathSync(url);

- Inside a browser:
We perform file name normalization as follows:

let request = new XMLHttpRequest();
request.open('HEAD', url, false);
request.send();
res = request.responseURL;

The predicate absolute_file_name/2 is not found in the ISO
core standard. We use the absolute file name to log what has
been loaded. There is also a new predicate current_source/1

to inspect this log. See also:

Preview: Predicate ensure_loaded/1 for Dogelog runtime. (Jekejeke) https://twitter.com/dogelogch/status/1425216777890451456

Preview: Predicate ensure_loaded/1 for Dogelog runtime. (Jekejeke) https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Montag, 2. August 2021 um 18:48:07 UTC+2:

Dear All,

Teaching Dogelog more tricks. From now on you don't
need to use (:-)/2 together with write/1 and friends.
There is a new (?-)/2, and you can for example input:

append([], X, X).
append([X|Y], Z, [X|T]) :- append(Y, Z, T).

?- limit(2,offset(1,append(X, Y, [1,2,3]))).

It will then automatically show:

X = [1], Y = [2, 3];
X = [1, 2], Y = [3]

See also:

Preview: Unattended Dogelog query answers. (Jekejeke) https://twitter.com/dogelogch/status/1422206395798204422

Preview: Unattended Dogelog query answers. (Jekejeke) https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

Have Fun!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

There are rumors, that Forth was prototyped in Prolog,
similar like Erlang was born. In some astronomic observatory
in Argentina they found this fragment:

forth([Op|Rest]) --> word(Op), forth(Rest).
forth([]) --> [].

word(+), [Result] --> [Number1, Number2], {Result is Number1+Number2}.
word(*), [Result] --> [Number1, Number2], {Result is Number1*Number2}. word(Number), [Number] --> {number(Number)}.

?- forth([5,3,+,7,2,+,*],[],X).
X = [72] .

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Bug the Dogelog runtime does not yet have DCG.
This is an open ticket, dunno yet when it gets closed:

Will need DCG for Dogelog self compilation #2 https://github.com/jburse/dogelog-moon/issues/2

What is DCG:

There is a special notation called definite clause grammars (DCGs). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prolog_syntax_and_semantics#Definite_clause_grammars

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Donnerstag, 12. August 2021 um 19:40:40 UTC+2:

There are rumors, that Forth was prototyped in Prolog,
similar like Erlang was born. In some astronomic observatory
in Argentina they found this fragment:

forth([Op|Rest]) --> word(Op), forth(Rest).
forth([]) --> [].

word(+), [Result] --> [Number1, Number2], {Result is Number1+Number2}. word(*), [Result] --> [Number1, Number2], {Result is Number1*Number2}. word(Number), [Number] --> {number(Number)}.

?- forth([5,3,+,7,2,+,*],[],X).
X = [72] .

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Dogelog runtime progressed over the last weeks. The milestones
were ensure_loaded/1 for ISO core standard conforming Prolog texts,
and unattended query answerer and recently first argument indexing.

Despite all this progress we have the feeling that the real potential
of the Dogelog runtime has not yet been demonstrated. Namely that
the cross compiler opens the door to many new platforms and not

only the JavaScript platform. So here are some first beginnings:

Python Version of Dogelog Runtime machine https://twitter.com/dogelogch/status/1426528779707502592

Python Version of Dogelog Runtime machine https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

More best kept secrets of Prolog: Pattern Matching

Everybody loves pattern matching. Languages
like Python, release 3.10, even provide it
now. There is now a match/case statement

in Python. But Prolog users will scratch their
head. Will my if-then-else be as fast as a
imperative switch jump table lookup?

Dogelog runtime has stepped up its game
concerning pattern matching. It now provides
ECLiPSe Prolog disjunction and if-then-else

indexing. Take this example:

?- [user].
foo(X,Y) :- X=baz, Y=2; X=bar -> Y=1.

SWI-Prolog leaves a choice point, so no
clause indexing used:

/* SWI-Prolog 8.3.26 */
?- foo(baz,Z).
Z = 2 ; %%% Spurious Choice Point
false.

Dogelog doesn't leave a choice point, since
it can index the disjunction and if-then-else:

/* Dogelog Runtime 0.9.3 */
?- foo(baz,Z).
Z = 2. %%% No Choice Point

See also:

Preview: Dogelog disjunction and if-then-else indexing. (Jekejeke) https://twitter.com/dogelogch/status/1433446729974796293

Preview: Dogelog disjunction and if-then-else indexing. (Jekejeke) https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Samstag, 14. August 2021 um 15:04:55 UTC+2:

The Dogelog runtime progressed over the last weeks. The milestones
were ensure_loaded/1 for ISO core standard conforming Prolog texts,
and unattended query answerer and recently first argument indexing.

Despite all this progress we have the feeling that the real potential
of the Dogelog runtime has not yet been demonstrated. Namely that
the cross compiler opens the door to many new platforms and not

only the JavaScript platform. So here are some first beginnings:

Python Version of Dogelog Runtime machine https://twitter.com/dogelogch/status/1426528779707502592

Python Version of Dogelog Runtime machine https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

We finally sat down and implemented eval_term(). The new
eval_term() routine makes our Prolog based implementation of is/2
obsolete. The old realization did use (=..)/2 in two places

and call/1. The new implementation bypasses Prolog and
directly uses host language means. We tested the new version
of Dogelog runtime agains the current Scryer-Prolog version:

Preview: Dogelog Runtime beats Scryer Prolog by 30%. (Jekejeke) https://twitter.com/dogelogch/status/1434318760064790530

Preview: Dogelog Runtime beats Scryer Prolog by 30%. (Jekejeke) https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

Although this is an encouraging result, it has also its drawbacks.
One might wish that a (=..)/2 and call/1 based implementation is
fast enough. Also a Prolog based implementation has the

advantage that it works with user defined predicates as evaluable
functions as well. We had a bridge in Jekejeke Prolog to allow that.
A next step is to bring this bridge also to Dogelog runtime, so that

user defined evaluable functions become possible as well.
Or invent something new to have the cake and eat it too.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Meanwhile maintaining a JavaScript and
Python version in parallel.

The Standard Python version of Dogelog runtime
is annoyingly slow. So we gave it a try with
andother Python, and it was 6x times faster.

We could test GraalVM. We worked around the missing
match in Python 3.8 by replacing it with if-then-else.
Performance is a little better, we find:

/* Standard Python Version, Warm Run */
?- time(fibo(23,X)).
% Wall 3865 ms, gc 94 ms, 71991 lips
X = 46368.

/* GraalVM Python Version, Warm Warm Run */
?- time(fibo(23,X)).
% Wall 695 ms, gc 14 ms, 400356 lips
X = 46368.

See also:

JDK 1.8 GraalVM Python is 6x faster than Standard Python https://twitter.com/dogelogch/status/1437395917167112193

JDK 1.8 GraalVM Python is 6x faster than Standard Python https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

Mostowski Collapse wrote:

Dear All,

Ok a simple mark and sweep works, and
a simple trigger mechanism does the job:

ANN: Dogelog Runtime, Prolog to the Moon (2021) https://qiita.com/j4n_bur53/items/17f86429745426bd14fd

And we are 10x times faster than TauProlog! LoL

Best Regards

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

I am not testing this use-case. But a related
use-case might highlight why speed did never
hurt anybody.

Lets say you program a flying drone with Python,
and the measurement is from the drone sensor
and communication systems.

Lets say you are using the idle time between
measurements for some complex planning. It
is then not true that you have anyway

to wait for the measurement.

Hope this helps!

BTW: If somebody knows another Python implementation
I am happy to test this implementation as well.
I am assuming that the standard Python python.exe

I tested amounts to CPython? Not sure. And the
GraalVM is practically the same as JPython? Not
sure either.

Opinion: Anyone who is counting on Python for truly fast compute

speed is probably using Python for the wrong purpose. Here, we use
Python to control Test Equipment, to set up the equipment and ask for a measurement, get it, and proceed to the next measurement; and at the end produce a nice formatted report. If we wrote the test script in C or
Rust or whatever it could not run substantially faster because it is communicating with the test equipment, setting it up and waiting for
responses, and that is where the vast majority of the time goes.
Especially if the measurement result requires averaging it can take a
while. In my opinion this is an ideal use for Python, not just because
the speed of Python is not important, but also because we can easily
find people who know Python, who like coding in Python, and will join
the company to program in Python ... and stay with us.

--- Joseph S.

Mostowski Collapse schrieb:

Meanwhile maintaining a JavaScript and
Python version in parallel.

The Standard Python version of Dogelog runtime
is annoyingly slow. So we gave it a try with
andother Python, and it was 6x times faster.

We could test GraalVM. We worked around the missing
match in Python 3.8 by replacing it with if-then-else.
Performance is a little better, we find:

/* Standard Python Version, Warm Run */
?- time(fibo(23,X)).
% Wall 3865 ms, gc 94 ms, 71991 lips
X = 46368.

/* GraalVM Python Version, Warm Warm Run */
?- time(fibo(23,X)).
% Wall 695 ms, gc 14 ms, 400356 lips
X = 46368.

See also:

JDK 1.8 GraalVM Python is 6x faster than Standard Python https://twitter.com/dogelogch/status/1437395917167112193

JDK 1.8 GraalVM Python is 6x faster than Standard Python https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

Mostowski Collapse wrote:

Dear All,

Ok a simple mark and sweep works, and
a simple trigger mechanism does the job:

ANN: Dogelog Runtime, Prolog to the Moon (2021)
https://qiita.com/j4n_bur53/items/17f86429745426bd14fd

And we are 10x times faster than TauProlog! LoL

Best Regards

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, 15 September 2021 at 17:46:15 UTC+2, Julio Di Egidio wrote:

On Wednesday, 15 September 2021 at 16:11:48 UTC+2, Mostowski Collapse wrote:

Opinion: Anyone who is counting on Python for truly fast compute

speed is probably using Python for the wrong purpose.

You just don't know anything about this environment: those who need fast computation rather use *libraries* where all the performance critical parts are written in native code... and that's pretty customary in Python.

That doesn't mean Python is flawless, indeed (IMO) it isn't in so many ways: to the point that, for more professional solutions in the maths/statistics realms in particular, people rather use R: yet, the primary reason is not so not so much performance

but really the solidity/structure of the language per se...

Good grief, I thought we were in comp-lang-python... You are indeed just *off-topic* here: I mean, an announcement for a JS-based engine is welcome, but you posting your Python implementation diary in this group is as off-topic as it can be.

*Plonk*

Julio

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, 15 September 2021 at 16:11:48 UTC+2, Mostowski Collapse wrote:

Opinion: Anyone who is counting on Python for truly fast compute

speed is probably using Python for the wrong purpose.

You just don't know anything about this environment: those who need fast computation rather use *libraries* where all the performance critical parts are written in native code... and that's pretty customary in Python.

That doesn't mean Python is flawless, indeed (IMO) it isn't in so many ways: to the point that, for more professional solutions in the maths/statistics realms in particular, people rather use R: yet, the primary reason is not so not so much performance
but really the solidity/structure of the language per se...

Julio

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

I am having a cross language problem.

I really wonder why my Python implementation
is a factor 40 slower than my JavaScript implementation.
Structurally its the same code.

You can check yourself:

Python Version: https://github.com/jburse/dogelog-moon/blob/main/devel/runtimepy/machine.py

JavaScript Version: https://github.com/jburse/dogelog-moon/blob/main/devel/runtime/machine.js

Its the same while, if-then-else, etc.. its the same
classes Variable, Compound etc.. Maybe I could speed
it up by some details. For example to create an array
of length n, I use in Python:

temp = [NotImplemented] * code[pos]
pos += 1

Whereas in JavaScript I use, also
in exec_build2():

temp = new Array(code[pos++]);

So I hear Guido doesn't like ++. So in Python I use +=
and a separate statement as a workaround. But otherwise,
what about the creation of an array,

is the the idiom [_] * _ slow? I am assuming its
compiled away. Or does it really first create an
array of size 1 and then enlarge it?

Julio Di Egidio wrote:

On Wednesday, 15 September 2021 at 17:46:15 UTC+2, Julio Di Egidio wrote:

On Wednesday, 15 September 2021 at 16:11:48 UTC+2, Mostowski Collapse wrote: >>

Opinion: Anyone who is counting on Python for truly fast compute

speed is probably using Python for the wrong purpose.

You just don't know anything about this environment: those who need fast computation rather use *libraries* where all the performance critical parts are written in native code... and that's pretty customary in Python.

That doesn't mean Python is flawless, indeed (IMO) it isn't in so many ways: to the point that, for more professional solutions in the maths/statistics realms in particular, people rather use R: yet, the primary reason is not so not so much

performance but really the solidity/structure of the language per se...

Good grief, I thought we were in comp-lang-python... You are indeed just *off-topic* here: I mean, an announcement for a JS-based engine is welcome, but you posting your Python implementation diary in this group is as off-topic as it can be.

*Plonk*

Julio

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

A friend just sent me a Web Sudoku made with Dogelog Runtime https://gist.github.com/jburse/c85297e97091caf22d306dd8c8be12fe#gistcomment-3895696

LoL

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Mittwoch, 15. September 2021 um 18:49:11 UTC+2:

I am having a cross language problem.

I really wonder why my Python implementation
is a factor 40 slower than my JavaScript implementation.
Structurally its the same code.

You can check yourself:

Python Version: https://github.com/jburse/dogelog-moon/blob/main/devel/runtimepy/machine.py

JavaScript Version: https://github.com/jburse/dogelog-moon/blob/main/devel/runtime/machine.js

Its the same while, if-then-else, etc.. its the same
classes Variable, Compound etc.. Maybe I could speed
it up by some details. For example to create an array
of length n, I use in Python:

temp = [NotImplemented] * code[pos]
pos += 1

Whereas in JavaScript I use, also
in exec_build2():

temp = new Array(code[pos++]);

So I hear Guido doesn't like ++. So in Python I use +=
and a separate statement as a workaround. But otherwise,
what about the creation of an array,

is the the idiom [_] * _ slow? I am assuming its
compiled away. Or does it really first create an
array of size 1 and then enlarge it?
Julio Di Egidio wrote:

On Wednesday, 15 September 2021 at 17:46:15 UTC+2, Julio Di Egidio wrote:

On Wednesday, 15 September 2021 at 16:11:48 UTC+2, Mostowski Collapse wrote:

Opinion: Anyone who is counting on Python for truly fast compute

speed is probably using Python for the wrong purpose.

You just don't know anything about this environment: those who need fast computation rather use *libraries* where all the performance critical parts are written in native code... and that's pretty customary in Python.

That doesn't mean Python is flawless, indeed (IMO) it isn't in so many ways: to the point that, for more professional solutions in the maths/statistics realms in particular, people rather use R: yet, the primary reason is not so not so much

performance but really the solidity/structure of the language per se...

Good grief, I thought we were in comp-lang-python... You are indeed just *off-topic* here: I mean, an announcement for a JS-based engine is welcome, but you posting your Python implementation diary in this group is as off-topic as it can be.

*Plonk*

Julio

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The new release 0.9.6 is quite speedy:

"Maailman vaikein" 850002400720000009004000000000107002305000900040000000000080070017000000000036040
time(solve(Puzzle))
% Wall 41354 ms, gc 520 ms, 3143029 lips
in Browser

See also:

Preview: New para/1 instruction for Dogelog runtime. (Jekejeke) https://twitter.com/dogelogch/status/1438586282502983682

Preview: New para/1 instruction for Dogelog runtime. (Jekejeke) https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogelog

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Donnerstag, 16. September 2021 um 22:27:41 UTC+2:

A friend just sent me a Web Sudoku made with Dogelog Runtime https://gist.github.com/jburse/c85297e97091caf22d306dd8c8be12fe#gistcomment-3895696

LoL
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Mittwoch, 15. September 2021 um 18:49:11 UTC+2:

I am having a cross language problem.

I really wonder why my Python implementation
is a factor 40 slower than my JavaScript implementation.
Structurally its the same code.

You can check yourself:

Python Version: https://github.com/jburse/dogelog-moon/blob/main/devel/runtimepy/machine.py

JavaScript Version: https://github.com/jburse/dogelog-moon/blob/main/devel/runtime/machine.js

Its the same while, if-then-else, etc.. its the same
classes Variable, Compound etc.. Maybe I could speed
it up by some details. For example to create an array
of length n, I use in Python:

temp = [NotImplemented] * code[pos]
pos += 1

Whereas in JavaScript I use, also
in exec_build2():

temp = new Array(code[pos++]);

So I hear Guido doesn't like ++. So in Python I use +=
and a separate statement as a workaround. But otherwise,
what about the creation of an array,

is the the idiom [_] * _ slow? I am assuming its
compiled away. Or does it really first create an
array of size 1 and then enlarge it?
Julio Di Egidio wrote:

On Wednesday, 15 September 2021 at 17:46:15 UTC+2, Julio Di Egidio wrote:

On Wednesday, 15 September 2021 at 16:11:48 UTC+2, Mostowski Collapse wrote:

Opinion: Anyone who is counting on Python for truly fast compute

speed is probably using Python for the wrong purpose.

You just don't know anything about this environment: those who need fast computation rather use *libraries* where all the performance critical parts are written in native code... and that's pretty customary in Python.

That doesn't mean Python is flawless, indeed (IMO) it isn't in so many ways: to the point that, for more professional solutions in the maths/statistics realms in particular, people rather use R: yet, the primary reason is not so not so much

performance but really the solidity/structure of the language per se...

Good grief, I thought we were in comp-lang-python... You are indeed just *off-topic* here: I mean, an announcement for a JS-based engine is welcome, but you posting your Python implementation diary in this group is as off-topic as it can be.

*Plonk*

Julio

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Do you say Python should not be used to implement
such things? In my opinion, Python has a high potential
to implement Prolog, because it has also ast.parse()

and compile(). But I do not yet have a showcase that uses
these features of Python to compile Prolog. I dont work 24/7
and I cannot clone myself. Currently the Prolog code is interpreted.

I have a prototype where Prolog code is compiled into JavaScript,
but I did not yet try this approach with Python. Here you see how
JavaScript closures are generated, a first prototype:

const alt4 = make_defined([new Clause(1, [0, 0], function(
display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound(
"==", [deref(actual.args[0]), "end_of_file"]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound("$CUT", [deref(display[0])]), cont
])]))}, 0, undefined), new Clause(1, [0, 0], function(
display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound( "expand_include", [deref(actual.args[0]), deref(actual.args[1]
), display[0] = new Variable()]), new Compound(".",
[new Compound("handle_term", [deref(display[0])]), new Compound(
".", ["fail", cont])])]))}, -1, undefined)]);

add("next_term", 1, new Clause(2, [0], function(display, actual,
cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound("read_term", [deref(actual.args[0]), display[0] = new Variable(),
new Compound(".", [new Compound("variable_names", [
display[1] = new Variable()]), "[]"])]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound(alt4, [deref(display[0]), deref(
display[1])]), cont])]))}, -1, undefined));

https://github.com/jburse/dogelog-moon/issues/184

Will do the same for Python in the next weeks. Then later this approach
will be combined with a few planned optimizations. So far got a 25%
speed increase for JavaScript with this new compilation scheme, but

there is no official release out yet, that features this approach. And
there should be much more in it, also for Python.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 19/09/2021 21:28, Mostowski Collapse wrote:

<snip>

const alt4 = make_defined([new Clause(1, [0, 0], function(
display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound(
"==", [deref(actual.args[0]), "end_of_file"]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound("$CUT", [deref(display[0])]), cont
])]))}, 0, undefined), new Clause(1, [0, 0], function(
display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound( "expand_include", [deref(actual.args[0]), deref(actual.args[1]
), display[0] = new Variable()]), new Compound(".",
[new Compound("handle_term", [deref(display[0])]), new Compound(
".", ["fail", cont])])]))}, -1, undefined)]);

add("next_term", 1, new Clause(2, [0], function(display, actual,
cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound("read_term", [deref(actual.args[0]), display[0] = new Variable(),
new Compound(".", [new Compound("variable_names", [
display[1] = new Variable()]), "[]"])]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound(alt4, [deref(display[0]), deref(
display[1])]), cont])]))}, -1, undefined));

<snip>

Please don't show us unreadable code.

John

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Its not supposed to be readable. Its machine generated.

John Harris schrieb am Montag, 20. September 2021 um 19:11:49 UTC+2:

On 19/09/2021 21:28, Mostowski Collapse wrote:

<snip>

const alt4 = make_defined([new Clause(1, [0, 0], function(
display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound(
"==", [deref(actual.args[0]), "end_of_file"]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound("$CUT", [deref(display[0])]), cont
])]))}, 0, undefined), new Clause(1, [0, 0], function(
display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound( "expand_include", [deref(actual.args[0]), deref(actual.args[1]
), display[0] = new Variable()]), new Compound(".",
[new Compound("handle_term", [deref(display[0])]), new Compound(
".", ["fail", cont])])]))}, -1, undefined)]);

add("next_term", 1, new Clause(2, [0], function(display, actual,
cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound("read_term", [deref(actual.args[0]), display[0] = new Variable(),
new Compound(".", [new Compound("variable_names", [
display[1] = new Variable()]), "[]"])]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound(alt4, [deref(display[0]), deref(
display[1])]), cont])]))}, -1, undefined));

<snip>

Please don't show us unreadable code.

John

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Woa! There is some competition for JavaScript and
node.exe. PyPy is faster! Faster than GraalVM. Now
I get for my usual Python benchmark, figures in
milliseconds:

Standard GraalVM PyPy
170'996 28'523 9'755

Not bad. Only like 2x times slower than node.exe.
Now imaging I can realize the ast.parse() and
compile() idea as well! (Made an experiment
today, testing some corner with evaluation)

BTW: Here the full results. Was using:
pypy3.7-v7.3.5-win64\pypy3.exe

Test Standard GraalVM PyPy
nrev 20'389 3'611 1'254
crypt 17'103 3'248 960
deriv 20'808 3'111 1'250
poly 17'518 3'045 1'149
qsort 20'191 3'243 1'127
tictac 13'761 2'469 783
queens 17'691 3'242 1'024
query 6'161 1'155 313
mtak 17'209 2'300 907
perfect 20'165 3'099 988
calc N/A N/A N/A
Total 170'996 28'523 9'755

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Montag, 20. September 2021 um 20:04:42 UTC+2:

Its not supposed to be readable. Its machine generated.
John Harris schrieb am Montag, 20. September 2021 um 19:11:49 UTC+2:

On 19/09/2021 21:28, Mostowski Collapse wrote:

<snip>

const alt4 = make_defined([new Clause(1, [0, 0], function(
display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound(
"==", [deref(actual.args[0]), "end_of_file"]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound("$CUT", [deref(display[0])]), cont
])]))}, 0, undefined), new Clause(1, [0, 0], function(
display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound( "expand_include", [deref(actual.args[0]), deref(actual.args[1]
), display[0] = new Variable()]), new Compound(".",
[new Compound("handle_term", [deref(display[0])]), new Compound(
".", ["fail", cont])])]))}, -1, undefined)]);

add("next_term", 1, new Clause(2, [0], function(display, actual,
cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound("read_term", [deref(actual.args[0]), display[0] = new Variable(),
new Compound(".", [new Compound("variable_names", [
display[1] = new Variable()]), "[]"])]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound(alt4, [deref(display[0]), deref(
display[1])]), cont])]))}, -1, undefined));

<snip>

Please don't show us unreadable code.

John

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

That I get censored on Python pipermail, is possibly an
out burst of taking Python too literal, like here:

Monty Python - She's a witch!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

But we can turn this into a FLiP, a Logical Framework in Python exercise:

"There are ways of telling whether she's a witch."
"What do you do with witches?" "Burn them!"
Ax.(Witch(x) -> Burn(x)) (1) Given
"Why do witches burn?" "'Cause they're made of wood!"
Ax.(Wood(x) -> Witch(x)) (2) Given
"How do we tell if she's made of wood?" "Does wood sink in water?" "It floats!" Ax.(Floats(x) -> Wood(x)) (3) Given
"What also floats in water?" "A duck!"
Floats(duck) (4) Given
"Exactly! So, logically ..."
"If she weights the same as a duck, she's made of wood!"
Ax.Ay.((Floats(x) & (weight(x) = weight(y))) -> Floats(y)) (5) Given
"We shall use my largest scales. ... Remove the supports!"
weight(duck) = weight(girl) (6) Given
Ay.((Floats(duck) & (weight(duck) = weight(y))) -> Floats(y)) (7) A-Elimination (5)
(Floats(duck) & (weight(duck) = weight(girl))) -> Floats(girl) (8) A-Elimination (7)
Floats(duck) & (weight(duck) = weight(girl)) (9) And-Introduction (4) (6) Floats(girl) (10) Implication-Elimination (Modus Ponens) (8) (9) Floats(girl) -> Wood(girl) (11) A-Elimination (3)
Wood(girl) (12) Implication-Elimination (Modus Ponens) (11) (10) "A witch! A witch!"
Wood(girl) -> Witch(girl) (13) A-Elimination (2)
Witch(girl) (14) Implication-Elimination (Modus Ponens) (13) (12) "Burn her! Burn!"
Witch(girl) -> Burn(girl) (15) A-Elimination (1)
Burn(girl) (16) Implication-Elimination (Modus Ponens) (15) (14) http://staff.washington.edu/jon/flip/www/witch.html

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Donnerstag, 23. September 2021 um 18:19:53 UTC+2:

A nice project could now be to redo this one,
see how the prover would perform:

FLiP, a Logical Framework in Python http://staff.washington.edu/jon/flip/www/index.html

The prover is listed here:

Proof checkers - Joseph Vidal-Rosset https://www.vidal-rosset.net/proof_checkers.html

Ha Ha, the prover was just right in front of my nose
all the time. But before venturing into such a quest,
need to add occurs check to the Dogelog runtime.

I had some very good dynamic optimization for
occurs check in Jekejeke Prolog, but for Dogelog
runtime everything is new, need to figure out what

optimizations could be applied there. There is a ticket
for occurs check already on GitHub:

Bring occurs check to Dogelog runtime #143 https://github.com/jburse/dogelog-moon/issues/143
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Dienstag, 21. September 2021 um 00:16:38 UTC+2:

Woa! There is some competition for JavaScript and
node.exe. PyPy is faster! Faster than GraalVM. Now
I get for my usual Python benchmark, figures in
milliseconds:

Standard GraalVM PyPy
170'996 28'523 9'755

Not bad. Only like 2x times slower than node.exe.
Now imaging I can realize the ast.parse() and
compile() idea as well! (Made an experiment
today, testing some corner with evaluation)

BTW: Here the full results. Was using:
pypy3.7-v7.3.5-win64\pypy3.exe

Test Standard GraalVM PyPy
nrev 20'389 3'611 1'254
crypt 17'103 3'248 960
deriv 20'808 3'111 1'250
poly 17'518 3'045 1'149
qsort 20'191 3'243 1'127
tictac 13'761 2'469 783
queens 17'691 3'242 1'024
query 6'161 1'155 313
mtak 17'209 2'300 907
perfect 20'165 3'099 988
calc N/A N/A N/A
Total 170'996 28'523 9'755
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Montag, 20. September 2021 um 20:04:42 UTC+2:

Its not supposed to be readable. Its machine generated.
John Harris schrieb am Montag, 20. September 2021 um 19:11:49 UTC+2:

On 19/09/2021 21:28, Mostowski Collapse wrote:

<snip>

const alt4 = make_defined([new Clause(1, [0, 0], function(
display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound(
"==", [deref(actual.args[0]), "end_of_file"]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound("$CUT", [deref(display[0])]), cont
])]))}, 0, undefined), new Clause(1, [0, 0], function(
display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound( "expand_include", [deref(actual.args[0]), deref(actual.args[1]
), display[0] = new Variable()]), new Compound(".",
[new Compound("handle_term", [deref(display[0])]), new Compound(
".", ["fail", cont])])]))}, -1, undefined)]);

add("next_term", 1, new Clause(2, [0], function(display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound("read_term", [deref(actual.args[0]), display[0] = new Variable(),
new Compound(".", [new Compound("variable_names", [
display[1] = new Variable()]), "[]"])]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound(alt4, [deref(display[0]), deref(
display[1])]), cont])]))}, -1, undefined));

<snip>

Please don't show us unreadable code.

John

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

A nice project could now be to redo this one,
see how the prover would perform:

FLiP, a Logical Framework in Python http://staff.washington.edu/jon/flip/www/index.html

The prover is listed here:

Proof checkers - Joseph Vidal-Rosset https://www.vidal-rosset.net/proof_checkers.html

Ha Ha, the prover was just right in front of my nose
all the time. But before venturing into such a quest,
need to add occurs check to the Dogelog runtime.

I had some very good dynamic optimization for
occurs check in Jekejeke Prolog, but for Dogelog
runtime everything is new, need to figure out what

optimizations could be applied there. There is a ticket
for occurs check already on GitHub:

Bring occurs check to Dogelog runtime #143 https://github.com/jburse/dogelog-moon/issues/143

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Dienstag, 21. September 2021 um 00:16:38 UTC+2:

Woa! There is some competition for JavaScript and
node.exe. PyPy is faster! Faster than GraalVM. Now
I get for my usual Python benchmark, figures in
milliseconds:

Standard GraalVM PyPy
170'996 28'523 9'755

Not bad. Only like 2x times slower than node.exe.
Now imaging I can realize the ast.parse() and
compile() idea as well! (Made an experiment
today, testing some corner with evaluation)

BTW: Here the full results. Was using:
pypy3.7-v7.3.5-win64\pypy3.exe

Test Standard GraalVM PyPy
nrev 20'389 3'611 1'254
crypt 17'103 3'248 960
deriv 20'808 3'111 1'250
poly 17'518 3'045 1'149
qsort 20'191 3'243 1'127
tictac 13'761 2'469 783
queens 17'691 3'242 1'024
query 6'161 1'155 313
mtak 17'209 2'300 907
perfect 20'165 3'099 988
calc N/A N/A N/A
Total 170'996 28'523 9'755
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Montag, 20. September 2021 um 20:04:42 UTC+2:

Its not supposed to be readable. Its machine generated.
John Harris schrieb am Montag, 20. September 2021 um 19:11:49 UTC+2:

On 19/09/2021 21:28, Mostowski Collapse wrote:

<snip>

const alt4 = make_defined([new Clause(1, [0, 0], function(
display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound(
"==", [deref(actual.args[0]), "end_of_file"]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound("$CUT", [deref(display[0])]), cont
])]))}, 0, undefined), new Clause(1, [0, 0], function(
display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound( "expand_include", [deref(actual.args[0]), deref(actual.args[1]
), display[0] = new Variable()]), new Compound(".",
[new Compound("handle_term", [deref(display[0])]), new Compound(
".", ["fail", cont])])]))}, -1, undefined)]);

add("next_term", 1, new Clause(2, [0], function(display, actual,
cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound("read_term", [deref(actual.args[0]), display[0] = new Variable(),
new Compound(".", [new Compound("variable_names", [
display[1] = new Variable()]), "[]"])]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound(alt4, [deref(display[0]), deref(
display[1])]), cont])]))}, -1, undefined));

<snip>

Please don't show us unreadable code.

John

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In reference to: https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.python/c/-F7dLYmN9sM/m/lN1rwbIgAgAJ

Mark Lawrence is also not visible on pipermail? Ha Ha, thats
the problem with this censoring, its like cherry picking, allmost
like the aledged organ trade in republic of china, We now

have the case that somebody picked up some link via another
Python channel, like the uncensored google groups, but on the
pipermail channel even the original link is not visible.

The annoying thing nowadays, you don't get an email anymore
that tells you "We are sorry, but we have banned you", this would
be too flattering and possibly make you famous, it all works now

under the hood as reported here:

What Are Shadowbans?
Shadowbans block a user or individual pieces of content
without letting the offending user know they’ve been blocked. https://builtin.com/marketing/shadowban

I must admit, I have applauded when Donald Trump was
banned from twitter, but this "management" of programming
language groups gets ridiculous.

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Donnerstag, 23. September 2021 um 18:39:58 UTC+2:

That I get censored on Python pipermail, is possibly an
out burst of taking Python too literal, like here:

Monty Python - She's a witch!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

But we can turn this into a FLiP, a Logical Framework in Python exercise:

"There are ways of telling whether she's a witch."
"What do you do with witches?" "Burn them!"
Ax.(Witch(x) -> Burn(x)) (1) Given
"Why do witches burn?" "'Cause they're made of wood!"
Ax.(Wood(x) -> Witch(x)) (2) Given
"How do we tell if she's made of wood?" "Does wood sink in water?" "It floats!"
Ax.(Floats(x) -> Wood(x)) (3) Given
"What also floats in water?" "A duck!"
Floats(duck) (4) Given
"Exactly! So, logically ..."
"If she weights the same as a duck, she's made of wood!"
Ax.Ay.((Floats(x) & (weight(x) = weight(y))) -> Floats(y)) (5) Given
"We shall use my largest scales. ... Remove the supports!"
weight(duck) = weight(girl) (6) Given
Ay.((Floats(duck) & (weight(duck) = weight(y))) -> Floats(y)) (7) A-Elimination (5)
(Floats(duck) & (weight(duck) = weight(girl))) -> Floats(girl) (8) A-Elimination (7)
Floats(duck) & (weight(duck) = weight(girl)) (9) And-Introduction (4) (6) Floats(girl) (10) Implication-Elimination (Modus Ponens) (8) (9) Floats(girl) -> Wood(girl) (11) A-Elimination (3)
Wood(girl) (12) Implication-Elimination (Modus Ponens) (11) (10)
"A witch! A witch!"
Wood(girl) -> Witch(girl) (13) A-Elimination (2)
Witch(girl) (14) Implication-Elimination (Modus Ponens) (13) (12)
"Burn her! Burn!"
Witch(girl) -> Burn(girl) (15) A-Elimination (1)
Burn(girl) (16) Implication-Elimination (Modus Ponens) (15) (14) http://staff.washington.edu/jon/flip/www/witch.html
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Donnerstag, 23. September 2021 um 18:19:53 UTC+2:

A nice project could now be to redo this one,
see how the prover would perform:

FLiP, a Logical Framework in Python http://staff.washington.edu/jon/flip/www/index.html

The prover is listed here:

Proof checkers - Joseph Vidal-Rosset https://www.vidal-rosset.net/proof_checkers.html

Ha Ha, the prover was just right in front of my nose
all the time. But before venturing into such a quest,
need to add occurs check to the Dogelog runtime.

I had some very good dynamic optimization for
occurs check in Jekejeke Prolog, but for Dogelog
runtime everything is new, need to figure out what

optimizations could be applied there. There is a ticket
for occurs check already on GitHub:

Bring occurs check to Dogelog runtime #143 https://github.com/jburse/dogelog-moon/issues/143
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Dienstag, 21. September 2021 um 00:16:38 UTC+2:

Woa! There is some competition for JavaScript and
node.exe. PyPy is faster! Faster than GraalVM. Now
I get for my usual Python benchmark, figures in
milliseconds:

Standard GraalVM PyPy
170'996 28'523 9'755

Not bad. Only like 2x times slower than node.exe.
Now imaging I can realize the ast.parse() and
compile() idea as well! (Made an experiment
today, testing some corner with evaluation)

BTW: Here the full results. Was using:
pypy3.7-v7.3.5-win64\pypy3.exe

Test Standard GraalVM PyPy
nrev 20'389 3'611 1'254
crypt 17'103 3'248 960
deriv 20'808 3'111 1'250
poly 17'518 3'045 1'149
qsort 20'191 3'243 1'127
tictac 13'761 2'469 783
queens 17'691 3'242 1'024
query 6'161 1'155 313
mtak 17'209 2'300 907
perfect 20'165 3'099 988
calc N/A N/A N/A
Total 170'996 28'523 9'755
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Montag, 20. September 2021 um 20:04:42 UTC+2:

Its not supposed to be readable. Its machine generated.
John Harris schrieb am Montag, 20. September 2021 um 19:11:49 UTC+2:

On 19/09/2021 21:28, Mostowski Collapse wrote:

<snip>

const alt4 = make_defined([new Clause(1, [0, 0], function( display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound( "==", [deref(actual.args[0]), "end_of_file"]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound("$CUT", [deref(display[0])]), cont
])]))}, 0, undefined), new Clause(1, [0, 0], function(
display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound( "expand_include", [deref(actual.args[0]), deref(actual.args[1]
), display[0] = new Variable()]), new Compound(".",
[new Compound("handle_term", [deref(display[0])]), new Compound( ".", ["fail", cont])])]))}, -1, undefined)]);

add("next_term", 1, new Clause(2, [0], function(display, actual, cont) {return(new Compound(".", [new Compound("read_term", [deref(actual.args[0]), display[0] = new Variable(),
new Compound(".", [new Compound("variable_names", [
display[1] = new Variable()]), "[]"])]), new Compound(
".", [new Compound(alt4, [deref(display[0]), deref(
display[1])]), cont])]))}, -1, undefined));

<snip>

Please don't show us unreadable code.

John

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)