Fifty Years of Prolog and Beyond
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10174/33387 https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068422000102 |
Resumo: | Both logic programming in general and Prolog in particular have a long and fascinating history, intermingled with that of many disciplines they inherited from or catalyzed. A large body of research has been gathered over the last 50 years, supported by many Prolog implementations. Many implementations are still actively developed, while new ones keep appearing. Often, the features added by different systems were motivated by the interdisciplinary needs of programmers and implementors, yielding systems that, while sharing the “classic” core language, in particular, the main aspects of the ISO-Prolog standard, also depart from each other in other aspects. This obviously poses challenges for code portability. The field has also inspired many related, but quite different languages that have created their own communities. This article aims at integrating and applying the main lessons learned in the process of evolution of Prolog. It is structured into three major parts. First, we overview the evolution of Prolog systems and the community approximately up to the ISO standard, considering both the main historic developments and the motivations behind several Prolog implementations, as well as other logic programming languages influenced by Prolog. Then, we discuss the Prolog implementations that are most active after the appearance of the standard: their visions, goals, commonalities, and incompatibilities. Finally, we perform a SWOT analysis in order to better identify the potential of Prolog and propose future directions along with which Prolog might continue to add useful features, interfaces, libraries, and tools, while at the same time improving compatibility between implementations. |
id |
RCAP_8ab52ecdf0fa2d870ee0636b09efb51b |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:dspace.uevora.pt:10174/33387 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Fifty Years of Prolog and BeyondBoth logic programming in general and Prolog in particular have a long and fascinating history, intermingled with that of many disciplines they inherited from or catalyzed. A large body of research has been gathered over the last 50 years, supported by many Prolog implementations. Many implementations are still actively developed, while new ones keep appearing. Often, the features added by different systems were motivated by the interdisciplinary needs of programmers and implementors, yielding systems that, while sharing the “classic” core language, in particular, the main aspects of the ISO-Prolog standard, also depart from each other in other aspects. This obviously poses challenges for code portability. The field has also inspired many related, but quite different languages that have created their own communities. This article aims at integrating and applying the main lessons learned in the process of evolution of Prolog. It is structured into three major parts. First, we overview the evolution of Prolog systems and the community approximately up to the ISO standard, considering both the main historic developments and the motivations behind several Prolog implementations, as well as other logic programming languages influenced by Prolog. Then, we discuss the Prolog implementations that are most active after the appearance of the standard: their visions, goals, commonalities, and incompatibilities. Finally, we perform a SWOT analysis in order to better identify the potential of Prolog and propose future directions along with which Prolog might continue to add useful features, interfaces, libraries, and tools, while at the same time improving compatibility between implementations.Cambridge University Press2023-01-11T15:49:29Z2023-01-112022-01-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://hdl.handle.net/10174/33387http://hdl.handle.net/10174/33387https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068422000102porPhilipp Körner, Michael Leuschel, João Barbosa, Vítor Santos Costa, Verónica Dahl, Manuel V. Hermenegildo, José F. Morales, Jan Wielemaker, Daniel Diaz, Salvador Abreu: Fifty Years of Prolog and Beyond. Theory Pract. Log. Program. 22(6): 776-858 (2022)ndndndndndndndndndndnd283Koerner, PhilippLeuschel, MichaelBarbosa, JoãoSantos Costa, VitorDahl, VerónicaHermenegildo, ManuelMorales, JoséWielemaker, JanDiaz, DanielAbreu, SalvadorCiatto, Giovanniinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2024-01-03T19:35:09Zoai:dspace.uevora.pt:10174/33387Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-20T01:22:13.143447Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Fifty Years of Prolog and Beyond |
title |
Fifty Years of Prolog and Beyond |
spellingShingle |
Fifty Years of Prolog and Beyond Koerner, Philipp |
title_short |
Fifty Years of Prolog and Beyond |
title_full |
Fifty Years of Prolog and Beyond |
title_fullStr |
Fifty Years of Prolog and Beyond |
title_full_unstemmed |
Fifty Years of Prolog and Beyond |
title_sort |
Fifty Years of Prolog and Beyond |
author |
Koerner, Philipp |
author_facet |
Koerner, Philipp Leuschel, Michael Barbosa, João Santos Costa, Vitor Dahl, Verónica Hermenegildo, Manuel Morales, José Wielemaker, Jan Diaz, Daniel Abreu, Salvador Ciatto, Giovanni |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Leuschel, Michael Barbosa, João Santos Costa, Vitor Dahl, Verónica Hermenegildo, Manuel Morales, José Wielemaker, Jan Diaz, Daniel Abreu, Salvador Ciatto, Giovanni |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Koerner, Philipp Leuschel, Michael Barbosa, João Santos Costa, Vitor Dahl, Verónica Hermenegildo, Manuel Morales, José Wielemaker, Jan Diaz, Daniel Abreu, Salvador Ciatto, Giovanni |
description |
Both logic programming in general and Prolog in particular have a long and fascinating history, intermingled with that of many disciplines they inherited from or catalyzed. A large body of research has been gathered over the last 50 years, supported by many Prolog implementations. Many implementations are still actively developed, while new ones keep appearing. Often, the features added by different systems were motivated by the interdisciplinary needs of programmers and implementors, yielding systems that, while sharing the “classic” core language, in particular, the main aspects of the ISO-Prolog standard, also depart from each other in other aspects. This obviously poses challenges for code portability. The field has also inspired many related, but quite different languages that have created their own communities. This article aims at integrating and applying the main lessons learned in the process of evolution of Prolog. It is structured into three major parts. First, we overview the evolution of Prolog systems and the community approximately up to the ISO standard, considering both the main historic developments and the motivations behind several Prolog implementations, as well as other logic programming languages influenced by Prolog. Then, we discuss the Prolog implementations that are most active after the appearance of the standard: their visions, goals, commonalities, and incompatibilities. Finally, we perform a SWOT analysis in order to better identify the potential of Prolog and propose future directions along with which Prolog might continue to add useful features, interfaces, libraries, and tools, while at the same time improving compatibility between implementations. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-01-01T00:00:00Z 2023-01-11T15:49:29Z 2023-01-11 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10174/33387 http://hdl.handle.net/10174/33387 https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068422000102 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10174/33387 https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068422000102 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Philipp Körner, Michael Leuschel, João Barbosa, Vítor Santos Costa, Verónica Dahl, Manuel V. Hermenegildo, José F. Morales, Jan Wielemaker, Daniel Diaz, Salvador Abreu: Fifty Years of Prolog and Beyond. Theory Pract. Log. Program. 22(6): 776-858 (2022) nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd 283 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Cambridge University Press |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Cambridge University Press |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799136703962677248 |