Re: MU-Prolog

Article View: comp.lang.prolog

Article #2770

#2770

From: Lee Naish
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1987 04:09

11 lines
1023 bytes

In article <1026@mipos3.intel.com> sundar@mipos3.UUCP (Sundar R. Iyengar ~) writes:
>In article <1285@bgsuvax.UUCP> maner@bgsuvax.UUCP (Walter Maner) writes:
>>Could anyone compare MU-Prolog with Quintus (or CProlog) for me?  I don't
>
>Quintus has two advantages (it may have others, but I find these
>most useful): a compilation facility and a foreign function interface.

MU-Prolog and (some versions of) CProlog also have foreign function
interfaces (though not quite as easy to use).

	Lee Naish

Technical Details

Message-ID: <2248@mulga.oz>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!munnari!mulga!lee

References: <1285@bgsuvax.UUCP> <1026@mipos3.intel.com>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!munnari!mulga!lee
From: lee@mulga.oz (Lee Naish)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Subject: Re: MU-Prolog
Message-ID: <2248@mulga.oz>
Date: Sat, 19-Sep-87 00:09:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: mulga.2248
Posted: Sat Sep 19 00:09:51 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 20-Sep-87 15:10:48 EDT
References: <1285@bgsuvax.UUCP> <1026@mipos3.intel.com>
Reply-To: lee@mulga.UUCP (Lee Naish)
Organization: Comp Sci, Melbourne Uni, Australia
Lines: 11

Reply to Parent Message