Top Qs
Timeline
Chat
Perspective
Comparison of Prolog implementations
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Remove ads
The following Comparison of Prolog implementations provides a reference for the relative feature sets and performance of different implementations of the Prolog computer programming language. A comprehensive discussion of the most significant Prolog systems is presented in an article published in the 50-years of Prolog anniversary issue of the journal Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).[1]
Remove ads
Portability
Summarize
Perspective
Systems with a dark gray background are not supported any more. Arrows denote influences and inspiration of systems. Quick legend: JIT = "Just in Time Compiler", JVM = "Java Virtual Machine", TOAM = "Tree-Oriented Abstract Machine"
There are Prolog implementations that are radically different, with different syntax and different semantics (e.g. Visual Prolog)[2] and sub-communities have developed around different implementations.[2]
Code that strictly conforms to the ISO-Prolog core language is portable across ISO-compliant implementations. However, the ISO standard for modules is an extension which was not fully adopted in most Prolog systems.[2][1]
Factors that can adversely affect portability include: use of bounded vs. unbounded integer arithmetic, additional types such as string objects, advanced numeric types (rationals, complex), feature extensions such as Unicode, threads, and tabling.[3] Use of libraries unavailable in other implementations and library organisation:[2]
Currently, the way predicates are spread over the libraries and system built-ins differs enormously. [...] Fortunately, there are only few cases where we find predicates with the same name but different semantics (e.g.
delete/3)
Remove ads
Main features
Remove ads
Operating system and web-related features
Remove ads
Static analysis
Remove ads
Optimizations
Remove ads
Release
Remove ads
Benchmarks
- Benchmarking issues: Odd Prolog benchmarking, Performance differences.[14]
- Benchmarking software: older, Dobry's Benchmarks, Aquarius benchmark suite, (Bothe, 1990),[15] (Demoen et al. 2001), benchmark descriptions
- Benchmarking results: B-Prolog, SICStus, XSB,[16] SICStus vs Yap vs hProlog[17]
- Benchmarking results: Survey of java prolog engines by Michael Zeising
- Benchmarking results: OpenRuleBench yearly open-source benchmark of rule engines
Remove ads
Notes
References
External links
Wikiwand - on
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Remove ads