Peter Naur has explained that programming is theory building. With Prolog, the theory is also the program. Not so for any other language.

It’s more advanced and capable than any other language. It’s the only one that lets you specify what you know and also run it.

ChatCop: *about to arrest me*

Me: hey, you can't arrest me. I didn't do anything wrong

ChatCop: I'm sorry! You're absolutely right. I was going to arrest you, but I didn't check whether you broke any laws. I'll do better next time

ChatCop: *arrests me*

Doing OO properly requires 3 lines of tests for every line of code. But then you need to test your tests…

Thank you!! 🙏🫶
The poster makes me recall a bug from decades ago I couldn't solve after a week of effort. I thought I should resign. Ultimately rule 3 proved helpful. The issue was that a Comp Sci textbook that we referenced (and trusted) had a bug in its pseudocode.

Love & want a small version. (Shipping to 🇨🇦 is a little steep.) Am I to understand that the "The Pocket Guide to Debugging" PDF has this in it?

Even accepting the premise that AI produces useful writing (which no one should), using AI in education is like using a forklift at the gym. The weights do not actually need to be moved from place to place. That is not the work. The work is what happens within you.

I may need a little help now and then, but best to save your help for Sens fans.

Take a look at how orange and red Toronto is, in a sea of blue. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/co...

Take a look at this video: youtu.be/nmBkU-l1zyc?...

Yes, the learning curve is a actually an infinite loop: learn enough to do a thing, learn new idiom (blown mind included) and think that you “get it”, rewrite thing, repeat.

Prolog!

CHR will do that nicely and I’ve used it for such a purpose. Or use attributed variables or `when/2` to check vars as they are bound.

person: pardon me, do you have the time?

dead person: