Re: [eclipse-clp-users] saving the resolution list of a call

From: Thorsten Winterer <thorsten_winterer_at_...126...>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 08:31:34 +0200
Am 16.05.2010 17:22, schrieb Christian Wirth:
> expand(X,ResListIn,[F/A|ResListOut]) :- 
> functor(X,F,A),clause(X,C),((C=true)->(ResListOut=ResListIn);(join_string([F,A,"rec"],"/",String1),(containsKey(String1)->(ResListOut=ResListIn,call(X));(expand(C,ResListIn,ResListOut))))).
>
> containsKey(Key) :- clause(logicStorage(Key,_)).
>
> logicStorage is a dynamic predicate and contains all recursive 
> predicates. The resolutionlist of those predicates should not be saved.
> And ideas how to increase the speed further ? If requiered, i would also 
> be willing to make changes to the eclipse source code to have this 
> resolution list available.
>
>   

Instead of this:

expand(X,ResListIn,[F/A|ResListOut]) :-
        functor(X,F,A),
        clause(X,C),
        (
            C = true
        ->
            ResListOut=ResListIn
        ;
            join_string([F,A,"rec"],"/",String1),
            (
                containsKey(String1)
            ->
                ResListOut=ResListIn,
                call(X)
            ;
                expand(C,ResListIn,ResListOut)
            )
        ).



I would use something like this:

expand(X,ResListIn,[F/A|ResListOut]) :-
        (
            clause(X,true)
        ->
            ResListOut=ResListIn
        ;
            functor(X,F,A),
            recursive(F,A)
        ->
            ResListOut=ResListIn,
            call(X)
        ;
            expand(C,ResListIn,ResListOut)
        ).


1. The clause body C is only needed for the check C=true. You can use
clause(X,true) directly.

2. The use of join_string and containsKey seems expensive. Instead of
forming a string and then testing for that you can test for F and A
directly. You would need to rewrite containsKey, but I would consider
replacing that dynamic predicate with a static one anyway: If the list
of recursive predicates is known at the beginning, you can collect the
Functor/Arity specifications and then compile corresponding facts (I
used recursive(F,A) in the code above). By compiling them into a static
predicate, access will be much faster than with a dynamic predicate.
Depending on the number of recursive predicates, and therefore the
specifications that need to be checked, storing them in a data structure
that allows faster access than iterating over the facts should be
considered even if the list of recursive predicates is not known a priori.

Cheers,
Thorsten
Received on Mon May 17 2010 - 06:31:45 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jul 09 2018 - 02:05:29 CEST