Tabling in Mercury: Design and Implementation

Somogyi, Z; Sagonas, K

dc.contributor.author	Somogyi, Z	en
dc.contributor.author	Sagonas, K	en
dc.date.accessioned	2014-03-01T02:50:16Z
dc.date.available	2014-03-01T02:50:16Z
dc.date.issued	2006	en
dc.identifier.uri	https://dspace.lib.ntua.gr/xmlui/handle/123456789/35020
dc.subject	Design and Implementation	en
dc.title	Tabling in Mercury: Design and Implementation	en
heal.type	conferenceItem	en
heal.identifier.primary	10.1007/11603023_11	en
heal.identifier.secondary	http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11603023_11	en
heal.publicationDate	2006	en
heal.abstract	For any LP system, tabling can be quite handy in a variety of tasks, especially if it is efficiently implemented and fully integr ated in the language. Im- plementing tabling in Mercury poses special challenges for several reasons. First, Mercury is both semantically and culturally quite different from Prolog. While decreeing that tabled predicates must not include cuts is acceptable	en
heal.journalName	Practical Aspects of Declarative Languages	en
dc.identifier.doi	10.1007/11603023_11	en