Repository navigation
improve Vampire's Prolog compliance - #1017
Conversation
…se disjunctions where necessary
3ed3bd1 to
6da830c
Compare
|
I'm interested, but maybe less than I would have been 20 years ago when TPTP2X was the tool of choice for processing TPTP annotated formulae. Now I rely on TPTP4X more. Things were initially developed to run on under SICStus Prolog, then Eclipse, and now SWI. Seems that Scryer is a bit more anal, but that's prolly not a bad thing. If you can tweek my operator definitions to make things work in both SWI and Scryer, you will be making the world a better place. Anyhoo ...
|
|
I do not have access to the Prolog standard, so some of the below information is LLM-sourced and therefore maybe-hallucinated (what a time to be alive). But it's self-consistent and consistent with the Scryer/Trealla implementations.
None of this can actually be fixed in TPTP2X, we just have to be pedantic about printing if we want to be read by Prolog - although we could debate whether the TPTP grammar should be changed to reflect Prolog's constraints. |
Various downstream tools (mostly my own lol, but not entirely) rely on Vampire's TSTP output being valid Prolog data (modulo some TPTP operator definitions).
It almost is. Fix a few remaining edge cases, discovered with the help of Scryer Prolog's relatively strict ISO implementation:
~$truetokenises as~$,true. Write this as~ $true, which is the intended~,$,true~(A & B)reads as function application (!). Also add a space after negation here.@geoffgeoffgeoff3 may also be interested, but perhaps he has transcended Prolog.