Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!csri.toronto.edu!byu From: byu@csri.toronto.edu (Benjamin Yu) Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog Subject: Turbo Prolog (was Re: logic programs -> procedural lang?) Keywords: Prolog, typing, compiler efficiency Message-ID: <1989Sep29.144838.16225@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> Date: 29 Sep 89 18:48:38 GMT References: <27335@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> <869@gamera.cs.utexas.edu> <10822@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> <2181@munnari.oz.au> Organization: University of Toronto, CSRI Lines: 20 In article <2181@munnari.oz.au> ok@cs.mu.oz.au (Richard O'Keefe) writes: # In article <10822@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>, axaris@cs.buffalo.edu (Vassilios Axaris) writes: # > I have been surprized when I first got my Turbo Prolog compiler, in that I was # > required to specify the type of objects being used. # # In short, you were surprised to discover that what you got was NOT a # Prolog compiler, but a compiler for another (closely related, but still # OTHER) language. Can someone enlighten or remind me of what so terrible a thing which Borland has done in Turbo Prolog?? I am sure this has been discussed sometime ago, but I like to know some of the issues before I decide on the Prolog system to use for a course. Benjamin Yu University of Toronto CSNET, UUCP, BITNET: Department of Computer Science byu@csri.toronto.edu Toronto, Ontario Canada M5S 1A4 {uunet,watmath}!csri.utoronto.edu!byu (o) (416) 978 - 4299 (h) (416) 470 - 8206