Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!cs.utexas.edu!yale!cs.yale.edu!ciancarini-paolo
From: ciancarini-paolo@cs.yale.edu (paolo ciancarini)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Subject: Re: Object Oriented Prolog question
Message-ID: <29107@cs.yale.edu>
Date: 27 Feb 91 15:18:38 GMT
References: <1991Feb19.093713.4151@ecrc.de> <1991Feb26.175218.9997@IRO.UMontreal.CA> <4835@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au>
Sender: news@cs.yale.edu
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven, CT 06520-2158
Lines: 22
Nntp-Posting-Host: poe.systemsy.cs.yale.edu
Originator: cianca@poe.CS.Yale.Edu

In article <4835@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe) writes:
>In article <1991Feb26.175218.9997@IRO.UMontreal.CA>, mourad@IRO.UMontreal.CA (Shibl Mourad) writes:
>> I am looking for an Object Oriented Prolog to develop a Natural
>> Languages application.
>
>I am very interested in the application of Prolog to Natural Language
>processing.  (I'm teaching a course on it.)  Just as a matter of
>curiosity, why on earth do you want an *Object-Oriented* Prolog
>(whatever that is)?  "Pure" Prolog fits rather nicely with the
>declarative formalisms used by linguists (and the way that a
>"coroutining" system like NU Prolog or SICStus lets constraints
================================================================
>from several levels interleave can be rather useful).  PATR is an
                                              ======
>example of the kind of thing I have in mind.  Objects are things with
>state, side-effects elevated to a principle.  Isn't that rather a bad
>fit with linguistics?

Just as a matter of curiosity, what is a "coroutining system"
if it is not a system of things with independent states (i.e. objects) ?

Paolo Ciancarini