Replies: 2 comments 2 replies
-
|
I’d say yes, but how to do it is still an open question. Right now1, I think @bakaq is working on making it compatible with Trealla Prolog in #15. There’s also some relevant discussion happening here. Issue #24 is also related to this issue. You are very welcome if you have some insight about how to do it Footnotes
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
See previous discussion about this at #1, in specific my thought process in #1 (comment). Basically, I think reimplementing LogTalk is too much work for a first thing, and a pure ISO (without system specific functionality like modules or We are thinking about wider compatibility somewhat, but I don't think it should be a priority at this point. Currently the things we depend that go beyond the original ISO 13211-1 are DCGs (comming in 13211-3), a Quintus-style module system, term expansion, This project is meant to just be an experiment for now, and it's public domain so eventually the relevant parts could be reused for a more general or more official package manager even if I completely lose interest. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
First of all thanks for trying to implement a long awaited package manager for Prolog.
In many places it is written explicitly that pkg.pl is for Scryer Prolog. Have you considered other Prologs? I think all of them can benefit from common package system. If there are some compatibility problems we can write for example small translation layer that will slightly massage module text to get accepted by the widest variety of Prologs.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions