Prolog compared with LISP?

Authors:
R. A. O'Keefe
Affiliations:
University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
Venue:
ACM SIGPLAN Notices
Year:
1983

Citing 5
Cited 3

Artificial Intelligence Programming

Artificial Intelligence Programming
Solving Symbolic Equations with PRESS

EUROCAM '82 Proceedings of the European Computer Algebra Conference on Computer Algebra
Prolog compared with LISP

LFP '82 Proceedings of the 1982 ACM symposium on LISP and functional programming
Prolog - the language and its implementation compared with Lisp

Proceedings of the 1977 symposium on Artificial intelligence and programming languages
An efficient easily adaptable system for interpreting natural language queries

Computational Linguistics

Benchmark semantics

ACM SIGPLAN Notices
Benchmark semantics

ACM SIGPLAN Notices
Benchmark semantics

ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.02

Visualization

Abstract

In the recent ACM Symposium on LISP and Functional Programming, there was a paper with the title "Prolog Compared With LISP" [2] . In it, Gutierrez presents a program in LISP, and a related program in Prolog, and uses the inferior performance of the latter to suggest in strong terms that advocates of Prolog may have over-stated its performance. However, his program makes very poor use of Prolog. In this article, I point out which features of Prolog have been misused and give guidelines for their proper use. I also compare a new Prolog and LISP program performing a similar task, and find that the execution times are comparable. This is in accord with earlier results [4].