Latest version of the standardization proposal (Oct 5 2009)

Discussion on the revision of the current Core standard

Moderator: Paulo Moura

Latest version of the standardization proposal (Oct 5 2009)

Postby Paulo Moura » Sun May 13, 2007 12:16 pm

Latest version of the standardization proposal:

http://logtalk.org/plstd/core.pdf

LaTeX source of the standardization proposal:

http://logtalk.org/plstd/core.tex

For earlier discussion regarding this proposal, please consult the following mailing list archives:

http://neve.di.ubi.pt/mailman/listinfo/prolog-standard

Paulo
Last edited by Paulo Moura on Thu Nov 20, 2008 6:34 pm, edited 11 times in total.
Paulo Moura
Logtalk developer
Paulo Moura
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 11:32 am
Location: Portugal

Comments

Postby daves » Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:33 am

Comments on Standarization Proposal

7.11.2.3 Flag: float_min_expoent. Is this a misspelling or required to avoid a conflict?
I had expected to read float_min_exponent.

7.11.2.4 Flag: float_max_expoent. Same as above. I had expected to read float_max_exponent.
Is this spelling required to avoid a conflict or circumvent some other restriction?

9.3.10 and 9.3.11. It is sad that min(A,B) and max(A,B) only take two(2) arguments when in
so many ways Prolog works with any number of values in a list. The proposal contains
no list minimum or list maximum.

9.5.3.2 The tangent has a singularity at (Pi/2) + (n * Pi). Is additional information about
this and other trigonometric function singularities and restrictions needed in the
proposal?
Dave Knewbee
daves
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 10:52 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: Comments

Postby Paulo Moura » Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:20 am

daves wrote:Comments on Standarization Proposal

7.11.2.3 Flag: float_min_expoent. Is this a misspelling or required to avoid a conflict?
I had expected to read float_min_exponent.

7.11.2.4 Flag: float_max_expoent. Same as above. I had expected to read float_max_exponent.
Is this spelling required to avoid a conflict or circumvent some other restriction?

Just a typo. Corrected.

daves wrote:9.3.10 and 9.3.11. It is sad that min(A,B) and max(A,B) only take two(2) arguments when in
so many ways Prolog works with any number of values in a list. The proposal contains
no list minimum or list maximum.

There are many other useful list predicates missing. The idea is to provide only basic list predicates and leave the rest of them to libraries.

daves wrote:9.5.3.2 The tangent has a singularity at (Pi/2) + (n * Pi). Is additional information about
this and other trigonometric function singularities and restrictions needed in the
proposal?


Yes. Contributions welcome.

Thanks for your comments.

Paulo
Paulo Moura
Logtalk developer
Paulo Moura
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 11:32 am
Location: Portugal


Return to Core Revision

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron