Talk:Palindrome detection: Difference between revisions

Talk:Palindrome detection (view source)

63 bytes removed , 15 years ago

m

→‎Prolog: cut spurious text from a previous writing, when it did not work because of me

Anonymous user

Revision as of 22:02, 10 February 2009 (view source) rosettacode>ShinTakezou (→‎Prolog) ← Older edit		Revision as of 22:03, 10 February 2009 (view source) rosettacode>ShinTakezou m (→‎Prolog: cut spurious text from a previous writing, when it did not work because of me) Newer edit →
Line 54: The functions you used for strings are in SWI Prolog, but not in GNU Prolog, so I can't test it, but the "logic" seems logical to me:D --[[User:ShinTakezou\|ShinTakezou]] 21:26, 10 February 2009 (UTC) Reading here and there I've realized that what we call String in Prolog could be simply called atom, and it exists atom_length/2 and atom_concat/3~~; but using these instead of string_* in your code gives errors~~; atom_concat(A1,A2,A3) is true if A3 (unbound atom) is the concatenation of A1 and A2 (bound atoms, i.e. known atoms?). The code compiles (with gplc, the GNU prolog compiler), but when I try pali('atom'), it says