You're viewing a comment by Dave Phillips and its responses.
You're viewing a comment by Dave Phillips and its responses.
I am being sponsored by Syntress since 2007! They bought me an amazing dedicated server to run catonmat on. If you're looking web services in Chicago area, I highly recommend the Syntress guys!
I love to read science books. They make my day and I get ideas for awesome blog posts, such as Busy Beaver, On Functors, Recursive Regular Expressions and many others.
Take a look at my
Amazon wish list, if you're curious about what I have planned reading next, and want to surprise me. :)


Very interesting read. Thanks.
A brief comment on your section on Prolog functors:
You say that functors in Prolog "refer to two things". This is a bit weird to say. Clearly, the second thing is just a convenience predicate that Prolog provides for analyzing structures/terms.
This convenience predicate isn't some separate notion of a functor any more than the =.. operator is. The fact that the predicate is called 'functor' shouldn't be taken too seriously. It could just as well have been called 'analyze'.
A functor in Prolog is the atom at the beginning of a structure. It is defined by its name and its arity.
(BTW, the =.. operator is used to decompose structures into lists. e.g. f(1, 2) =.. [f, 1, 2]. is a true statement.)
Reply To This Comment