Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ames!haven!udel!burdvax!finin@antares
From: finin@antares (Tim Finin)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Subject: Re: Fun. vs. Logic
Message-ID: <12089@burdvax.PRC.Unisys.COM>
Date: 19 Nov 89 05:29:09 GMT
References: <11500018@hpldola.HP.COM>
Sender: news@PRC.Unisys.COM
Reply-To: finin@antares (Tim Finin)
Organization: Unisys Paoli Research Center, PO Box 517, Paoli PA 19301
Lines: 20
In-reply-to: patch@hpldola.HP.COM (Pat Chkoreff)

In article <11500018@hpldola.HP.COM>, patch@hpldola (Pat Chkoreff) writes:
>I have been reading "Elements of Functional Programming", by Chris Reade,
>and it has caused me to reconsider the relative merits of logic versus
>functional programming languages.  Specifically, I am considering the merits
>of Prolog versus ML or Miranda....

It's hard and somewhat pointless to argue the merits of functional
programming versus logic programming languages independant of any
class of applications.  Luckily, we can have many programming
paradigms and chose one well suited for any given application.  I
think that Prolog, and most other LP languages, offer an interesting
and well integrated collection of tools: implicit backtracking,
unification, logic variables, relational programming, database, etc.
The result is very good for programming certain kinds of problems and
less good for others.

Tim
  Tim Finin                       finin@prc.unisys.com (internet)
  Unisys Paoli Research Center    215-648-7446 (office) 215-648-7412 (fax)
  PO Box 517, Paoli, PA 19301     215-386-1749 (home)