Comment by cess11
13 days ago
I don't know, most things I've written in Prolog 'runs backwards'. Doesn't seem special to me, things like cut and whatnot that might interfere do.
I kind of feel that clpfd, clpz and so on are just libraries, in what way do you consider them extensions to the language?
For me it's a neat way to model problems, and when I have I've commonly learned something new about the problem domain. Performance might not be great, interoperability and FFI might not be great, but as a tool for thought I really think it is.
In SWI for example, clpfd and friends rely on attribute values and hook predicates to interject the backtracking process with their own thing. SWI provides those things so that it can be extended.
Non trivial Prolog programs which only use pure predicates and do not use cut are sparse. Yet those are also the only circumstances in which things like clpfd will work without special consideration.
Besides pengines and web development I have very little experience with SWI specifically.
And, well, yeah, it's common (e.g. look for cuts in https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog/blob/master/src/lib/c... ), but I don't think I've ever written a cut and I use Prolog rather effectively as a tool for problem solving. It's an interesting and quite powerful way to model and examine problems even if I don't produce programs with 'imperative' interfaces. Some scripting tasks are also quite easy in Prolog, e.g. certain log parsing, stuff like that.