mother can be used in several ways. If both X and Y variables are uninitialized, then it looks for all mother relationships. If one of them is initialized, it looks for matching relationships. If both are initialized, it returns true if such a relationship exists.
sebastiancarlos
joined 2 years ago
Depends on how you want to define your domain knowledge.
The thing you need to define for sure is the predicate mother/2 (Which has arity 2, or in other words, two arguments). From then on, multiple options are available:
- Take
mother(X, Y)as an "axiom", and define mother terms for all elements:
mother(abel, eve).
mother(isaac, sarah).
- Derive
mother(X, Y)fromfemale(X)andparent(X, Y)terms.
mother(X, Y) :-
parent(X, Y),
female(Y).
- Smash the institutional gender power structures and define only
parent/2terms instead ofmother/2andfather/2.
something is a person if it is either Adam or Eve, or if it has a mother. We can express this in a single rule as follows:
person(X) :- (X=adam; X=eve; mother(X, Y)).
Brilliant!
How to write a programming novel?
- Cover: CSS
- Copyright Page: GNU GPLv3
- Intentionally Blank Page: Whitespace
- Notes For The Second Edition: Kotlin
- Notes for The First Edition: Java
- Front Matter: Markdown
- Dedication: Rust
- Prologue: Prolog
- Chapter 1: C
- Chapter 2: C++
- Chapter 3: C3
- Chapter 4: Forth
- Pull Quotes: Git
- Unexpected Sex Scene: LaTeX
- Dream Sequence: APL
- Cliffhanger Ending: Python 2
- Index: IndexedDB
- Errata: PHP
- Sequel: SQL
I can confirm it's Catppuccin Mocha. I am not currently aware of the background color issue, but I'll look into the matter soon. Thanks for letting me know. Also how dare you. But thanks.
class BaseFunction {
static #allowInstantiation = false;
constructor(...args) {
if (!BaseFunction.#allowInstantiation) {
throw new Error(
"Why are you trying to use 'new'? Classes are so 2015! Use our fancy 'run' method instead!"
);
}
for (const [name, validator] of this.parameters()) {
this[name] = validator(args.shift());
}
}
parameters() {
return [];
}
body() {
return undefined;
}
static run(...args) {
BaseFunction.#allowInstantiation = true;
const instance = new this(...args);
BaseFunction.#allowInstantiation = false;
return instance.body();
}
}
class Add extends BaseFunction {
parameters() {
return [
["a", (x) => Number(x)],
["b", (x) => Number(x)],
];
}
body() {
return this.a + this.b;
}
}
console.log(Add.run(5, 3)); // 8
Yes, I’ll host the source code on GitHub. I could consider mirroring it on Sourcehut if there’s enough interest, but I prefer the PR and Issues workflow on GitHub for collaboration. Plus, more people tend to have GitHub accounts than GitLab or Sourcehut, which makes it easier for contributors.
I get the concern about Microsoft, and while I’m not a fan of the company, GitHub has advantages that are hard to beat, especially for community reach. As for OpenAI potentially using the code, personally I don’t mind if my own code gets used for AI training.
I’ll be using an MIT license, in case you're curious. Everyone is free to mirror it anywhere.
It's Exclidraw (dark mode)
Totally understand your perspective, and I’m not here to push back against it. You’ve got a valid point.
I’ll just add that there are already commercial tools that do similar things to what I’m building. It’s interesting to consider how perceptions might shift if a tool were released by a company rather than a solo developer. Sometimes the context influences how a tool is interpreted, even if the underlying functionality remains the same. For what it’s worth, I have no commercial intent behind this.
Exactly! My tool is designed to work with existing time-tracking tools by processing their output. You can think of it as a post-processor that helps clean up and format the data.
Since there are already plenty of time-tracking tools out there (both CLI and GUI), I wanted something that could act as a flexible add-on for them.
Hey, thanks for the comment. I get that it might be used for something shady, but that’s not the intention. The primary goal is to clean up raw time-tracking data into a format that’s easy to present to clients or supervisors, especially for contexts when small gaps or irregularities should be absent.
I imagine most professionals aren’t expected to account for every single minute of their workday. For example, if you’re switching tasks or taking short breaks. It’s more about reporting general productivity or overall progression of tasks, not trying to inflate hours.
Anyone aiming for 'time fraud' could probably find easier methods. My focus is to make life easier for people who already track their work but want cleaner, more digestible reports.
Appreciate the feedback though, helps me make sure the use case is clear! :)
226
Working on a FOSS tool to convert raw work time data into a clean report for your boss or client. Any interest?
(lemmy.sdf.org)
It's almost done (it would take one or two weeks to clean it up for FOSS release). It's a CLI tool. It works great for my use case, but I'm wondering if there's any interest in a tool like this.
Say you have a simple time-tracking tool that tracks what you do daily. The only problem is that there are gaps and whatnot, which might not look nice if you need to send it to someone else. This tool fixes pretty much all of that.
Main format is a JSON with a "description", and either "duration" or a "start"/"end" pair. It supports the Timewarrior format out of the box (CLI Time tracking tool).
view more: next ›
This is a nice overview: CLPFD and CLPZ: Prolog Integer Arithmetic