Re: [eclipse-clp-users] Checking for existing clauses without dynamic definition?

From: Joachim Schimpf <jschimpf_at_...311...>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 13:20:28 +0200
On 29/05/2014 11:48, Marco Gavanelli wrote:
> Dear Gesche,
> 
> Maybe you could use abolish/1 to remove the dynamic predicate and then 
> use compile_term/1 to re-add the predicate in compiled form.
> 
> Example:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> [eclipse 1]: assert(p:-q).
> 
> Yes (0.00s cpu)
> [eclipse 2]: compile_term(q).
> source_processor.eco loaded in 0.00 seconds
> ...
> ecl_compiler.eco loaded in 0.05 seconds
> 
> Yes (0.05s cpu)
> [eclipse 3]: clause(p,X).
> 
> X = q
> Yes (0.00s cpu)
> [eclipse 4]: abolish(p/0).
> 
> Yes (0.00s cpu)
> [eclipse 5]: p.
> calling an undefined procedure p in module eclipse
> Abort
> [eclipse 6]: compile_term(p:-q).
> 
> Yes (0.00s cpu)
> [eclipse 7]: clause(p,X).
> procedure not dynamic in clause(p, X) in module eclipse
> Abort
> [eclipse 8]: p.
> 
> Yes (0.00s cpu)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------


Correct.  Here is a little utility that does everything:

:- tool(dynamic_to_static/1, dynamic_to_static_/2).
dynamic_to_static_(F/N, Module) :-
	functor(Head, F, N),
	findall(Head:-Body, clause(Head, Body), Clauses)@Module,
	abolish(F/N)@Module,
	compile_term(Clauses)@Module.


?- assert(p(111)), assert(p(222)).
Yes (0.00s cpu)

?- dynamic_to_static(p/1).
Yes (0.00s cpu)

?- is_dynamic(p/1).
No (0.00s cpu)

?- p(X).
X = 111
Yes (0.00s cpu, solution 1, maybe more)
X = 222
Yes (0.02s cpu, solution 2)


-- Joachim
Received on Thu May 29 2014 - 11:47:20 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jul 09 2018 - 02:05:30 CEST