Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!rutgers!iuvax!pur-ee!mendozag
From: mendozag@pur-ee.UUCP (Grado)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Subject: Re: self-replicating programs
Message-ID: <7045@pur-ee.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Nov-87 01:46:31 EST
Article-I.D.: pur-ee.7045
Posted: Mon Nov 23 01:46:31 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 25-Nov-87 20:10:36 EST
References: <1399@tulum.swatsun.UUCP> <309@udccvax1.acs.udel.EDU>
Reply-To: mendozag@pur-ee.UUCP (Victor M Grado)
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Lines: 28

In article <309@udccvax1.acs.udel.EDU> chiefdan@vax1.acs.udel.EDU (Newsgroups) writes:
>>	There was an interesting discussion about self-replicating
>>programs a while back in this newsgroup.  Umm, can people send me what

>>I'm trying to show that the code for
>>Prolog can be a lot shorter.  Please, help me, <sob>...
>>						-ag hirai
>I'd have  voted for doing the program in lisp.  You know...
>
>(defun x() (pp x))
>
>Anyhow, I'm a novice in prolog and would appreciate knowing an answer for this.
>chiefdan

 By analogy, if you accept the above Lisp program as valid, I guess you can also
 accept the following Prolog code:

  x :-
     listing(x/0).

 provided you don't have another clause for x of same arity. Or any other
 arity if you don't use x/0.
 Dull, isn't it?

 I am would like to see the mentioned previous postings.

 Vicid H) T