71–80 of 251 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes you think your brain isn't also brute forcing potential solutions subconciously and only surfacing the useful results?
Can you try calculating 101 * 70 in your head?
7 * 101 = 707 * 10 = 7,070
And computers don't brute-force multiplication either, so I'm not sure how this is relevant to the comment above?
Always felt this would be language that Sherlock Holmes would use...so be sure to wear the hat when learning it
-- from "The Valley of Fear" by Arthur Conan Doyle.
Had never heard of it before, and this is first I'm hearing of it since.
Also had other cool old shit, like CIB copies of Borland Turbo Pascal 6.0, old Maxis games, Windows 3.1
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "4. Prolog is good at solving reasoning problems." Plain Prolog's way of solving reasoning problems is effectively: for person in [martha, brian, sarah, tyrone]: if timmy.parent == person: print "solved!" You hard code some options, write a logical condition with placeholders, and Prolog brute-forces every option in every placeholder. It doesn't do reasoning . Arguably it lets a human express reasoning problems bet…
What makes you think your brain isn't also brute forcing potential solutions subconciously and only surfacing the useful results?
I am once again shilling the idea that someone should find a way to glue Prolog and LLMs together for better reasoning agents. https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=43948657 Thesis: 1. LLMs are bad at counting the number of r's in strawberry. 2. LLMs are good at writing code that counts letters in a string. 3. LLMs are bad at solving reasoning problems. 4. Prolog is good at solving reasoning problems. 5. ??? 6. LLM…
Prolog doesn't look like javascript or python so: 1. web devs are scared of it. 2. not enough training data? I do remember having to wrestle to get prolog to do what I wanted but I haven't written any in ~10 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I keep wishing for "regex for prolog", ie: being able to (in an arbitrary language) express some functional bits in "prolog-ish", and then be able to ask/query against it. let prologBlob = new ProLog() prologBlob.add( "a => b" ).add( "b => c" ) prologBlob.query( "a == c?" ) == True (not exactly that, but hopefully you get the gist) There's so much stuff regarding constraints, access control, relationship queries that…
There are a bunch of libraries that will do this - here's one example of a python one: https://github.com/yuce/pyswip - and a ruby one: https://github.com/preston/ruby-prolog
pl.consult("some-facts.pl")
pl.assertz("new(fact)")
while pl.Query(...).nextSolution():
print( X.value )
I've recently started modeling some of my domains/potential code designs in Prolog. I'm not that advanced. I don't really know Prolog that well. But even just using a couple basic prolog patterns to implement a working spec in the 'prolog way' is *unbelievably* useful for shipping really clean code designs to replace hoary old chestnut code. (prolog -> ruby)
I keep wishing for "regex for prolog", ie: being able to (in an arbitrary language) express some functional bits in "prolog-ish", and then be able to ask/query against it. let prologBlob = new ProLog() prologBlob.add( "a => b" ).add( "b => c" ) prologBlob.query( "a == c?" ) == True (not exactly that, but hopefully you get the gist) There's so much stuff regarding constraints, access control, relationship queries that…
I am once again shilling the idea that someone should find a way to glue Prolog and LLMs together for better reasoning agents. https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=43948657 Thesis: 1. LLMs are bad at counting the number of r's in strawberry. 2. LLMs are good at writing code that counts letters in a string. 3. LLMs are bad at solving reasoning problems. 4. Prolog is good at solving reasoning problems. 5. ??? 6. LLM…
What kind of problems is Prolog helping to solve besides GOFAI, theorem proving and computational linguistics?
Learn it now? I learned back in the 80s... and have since forgotten