Re: [Yap-users] More fun problems!

[Edward S. <esc...@ce...>]

On 02/24/2016 04:35 PM, Edward Schwartz wrote:

I forgot to include the query:

certainInstanceCallsMethodSet(C,S).

> Here is the problematic output:
> ok
> method(101)
> method(101)
> ok
> method(101)
> method(102)
> ok
> method(101)
> method(103)
> hey
> _164154
> hey2
> method(101)
> C = method(101),
> S = [method(101),method(102),method(103)] ? ;
> here we go
> method(104)
> done!
> false.
> 
> So the first rule is used to prove
> certainInstanceCallsMethod(method(101), method(101)),
> certainInstanceCallsMethod(method(101), method(102)), and
> certainInstanceCallsMethod(method(101), method(103)).
> 
> The second rule begins evaluating, but stops when it reaches
> certainVFTableEntry.  AFTER I hit semicolon some type of backtracking
> occurs and the second rule finishes, proving
> certainInstanceCallsMethod(method(101), method(104)).  If I execute the
> query again, all four methods are included in the resulting set.
> 
> It's possible and even likely that certainVFTableEntry is recursing and
> calling certainInstanceCallsMethod again; this is why we are using
> tabling.  Assuming I have rid my program of all coroutining, is this a
> bug, or is it some type of expected behavior?  In particular, why does
> the backtracking happen outside of the setof()?
> 
> Thanks again,
> 
> Ed
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
> APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
> Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
> Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140
> _______________________________________________
> Yap-users mailing list
> Yap...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/yap-users
>