Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!decwrl!labrea!rutgers!gatech!udel!burdvax!zeta!lang
From: lang@zeta.PRC.Unisys.COM (Francois-Michel Lang)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Subject: Re: Determining order of argument unification
Message-ID: <8249@burdvax.PRC.Unisys.COM>
Date: 9 Nov 88 14:26:01 GMT
References: <8192@burdvax.PRC.Unisys.COM> <1028@murtoa.cs.mu.oz.au>
Sender: news@PRC.Unisys.COM
Organization: Unisys Corporation, Paoli Research Center; Paoli, PA
Lines: 22

As the instigator of what I had intended as nothing more than
a fairly simple and informal puzzle, I apologize for having
roused the infamous O'Keefe dragon and prompted him to unleash
yet another onslaught of his matchless prose.  (Actually, 
in defense of Richard, this onslaught wasn't nearly so bad
as many I've witnessed before, but I still think OK
might have fit in nicely on George Bush's campaign staff -:) )

I stand corrected in my claim that LR and RL argument evaluation
are the only two "reasonable" orders.  Lee and Richard,
would you perhaps grant that LR and RL are "the two most
obvious or most commonly used" orders, which is perhaps
what I should have said to begin with?

Thanks to Lee for posting a response to my original question
which correctly answers it in the *spirit* in which it was asked!


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Francois-Michel Lang
Paoli Research Center, Unisys Corporation lang@prc.unisys.com (215) 648-7256
Dept of Comp & Info Science, U of PA      lang@cis.upenn.edu  (215) 898-9511