Re: SICStus prolog vs. SBprolog?

Article View: comp.lang.prolog

Article #1273

#1273

From: Saumya K. Debray
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 1990 14:35

13 lines
1005 bytes

> I am interested if anyone has compared these two prologs; what are
> their relative merits?

SICStus Prolog is in general much better than SB-Prolog: it's
faster, has a garbage collector and stack expander, and has
much better support.  It also supports primitives such as
freeze/1 that are unavailable in SB-prolog.  Also, I believe that
it's practically free for educational institutions.
-- 
Saumya Debray		CS Department, University of Arizona, Tucson

     internet:   debray@cs.arizona.edu
     uucp:       uunet!arizona!debray

Technical Details

Message-ID: <26528@megaron.cs.arizona.edu>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!know!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!noao!arizona!debray

References: <GARYM.90Oct14143102@cognos.uucp@uunet.uu.net> <40304@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!know!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!noao!arizona!debray
From: debray@cs.arizona.edu (Saumya K. Debray)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Subject: Re: SICStus prolog vs. SBprolog?
Summary: Sicstus is much better
Message-ID: <26528@megaron.cs.arizona.edu>
Date: 18 Oct 90 14:35:36 GMT
References: <GARYM.90Oct14143102@cognos.uucp@uunet.uu.net> <40304@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson
Lines: 13

Reply to Parent Message