minikanren

I have tried to use an implementation of mini-kanren in clojure. But been struggling to understand the difference between cond-a cond-u and cond-e. I seem to be quite clear about cond-e but understanding of cond-a and cond-u is quiet bad. cond-e takes a set of goals and then tries each of them... i.e tries all the branches that succeed. cond-a and cond-u on the contrary commit to the branch whose first predicate succeeds and cond-a returns all the possible successful unifications there after. while cond-u returns only the first successfull unification ... but however it seems like this

Recently I have been looking into graph databases like Neo4j and into logic programming in Prolog and miniKanren. From what I have learned so far, both allow specifying facts and relations between them, and also querying the resulting system for some selections. So, actually I cannot see much difference between them in that they both can be used to build a graph and query it, but using different syntax. However, they are presented as totally different kinds of software. Except the technicality that databases maybe propose a more space-time effective storage technology, and except that tiny

When I want to read up on logic programming I always stumble over two "main" ways to do it nowadays: miniKanren , a minilanguage introduced in The Reasoned Schemer and popular at the moment due to core.logic . Prolog , the first "big" logic programming language. What I'm interested in now: What are the principal technical differences between the two? Are they very similar in approach and implementation, or do they take completely different approaches to logic programming? Which branches of mathematics do they come from, and what are the theoretical foundations? William E. Byrd First, allow me

I'm reading the Reasoned Schemer . I have some intuition about how conde works. However, I can't find a formal definition of what conde / conda / condu / condi do. I'm aware of https://www.cs.indiana.edu/~webyrd/ but that seems to have examples rather than definitions. Is there a formal definition of conde , conda , condi , condu somewhere? In Prolog's terms, condA is "soft cut" , *-> , and condU is "committed choice" – a combination of once and a soft cut, so that (once(A) *-> B ; false) expresses the cut in (A, !, B) : A *-> B ; C %% soft cut, condA once(A) *-> B ; C %% committed choice,