On Nov 17, 3:47 pm, Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 18, 3:17 am, George Greene <gree...@email.unc.edu> wrote: > > > On Nov 17, 3:50 am, Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >www.microPROLOG.com >
> > There is NOTHING "micro" about this! > > Prolog ALREADY EXISTS! It's ALREADY WRITTEN! > > It ALREADY DOES THIS! > > Does not!
I have done some programming in Prolog. I have graded coursework in it. I WOULD know.
> It's a 2 logic value language (resolution capable) > written in a 1 logic value language (successful-match / negation-as- > failure)
Oh, PLEASE. NOBODY NEEDS TO UPGRADE Prolog from negation-as-failure to the real thing. That IS NOT what it's FOR!
> > YOU DON'T HAVE ANY SOFTWARE THAT DOES THIS IN A 4GL!
Again, bullshit. Plenty of people have written theorem-provers. That is A SIMPLE program. Hell, Resolution BY ITSELF is complete. If you can write a program that can perform all the possible resolutions on a finite set of axioms THEN YOU ARE DONE. It is horrendously inefficient and of NO practical use BUT IT IS COMPLETE if the system is finitely axiomatizable.