Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!uunet!ncrlnk!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!hplabs!hpfcdc!hpldola!patch
From: patch@hpldola.HP.COM (Pat Chkoreff)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Subject: Re: Re: Committed Choice
Message-ID: <11500014@hpldola.HP.COM>
Date: 12 Apr 89 02:37:48 GMT
References: <11500012@hpldola.HP.COM>
Organization: HP Elec. Design Div. -ColoSpgs
Lines: 21

Thanks for all the informative responses.  I `lose'.

    o  If-then-else has some connotations which are logically bogus.
       Cut doesn't pretend:  it's metalogical and proud of it.

    o  The `filter' example:

           p(X) :- g(X),( (f(X),!,fail) ; true) .

       shows how the cut can be superior when you really need to get
       zany.

    o  If-then-else is not appreciably more readable than cut:  after
       all, in both cases you're going to have a string of antecedent-
       consequent pairs.

So I'll keep cuts in their place:  down low in the system, and as scarce
as feasible.  I like omnidirectional predicates when I can have them.


- Patrick Chkoreff