UWN

Is this `w` thing really a good solution? After all it produces a non-sensical transscript.

See 7.10.2.12 Options on stream closure, maybe it would be better to add there something.

@infogulch : There should not be any overflow in this example at all. But in general, such overflows should be handled with the exception mechanism in Prolog #16

Looking at it, it seems the disjunction is not compiled properly. In any case, here is a version without disjunction replacing the existing `between_/3`. ``` between_(Lower, Upper, X) :- Lower...

... and it is also independent of the `(is)/2` compilation. ``` ?- [user]. between_or(Lower, Upper, X) :- succ(Lower, Lower0), between_(Lower0, Upper, X). ?- wam_instructions(between_or/3,Ls),maplist(portray_clause,Ls). allocate(3). get_variable(y(3),2). get_variable(y(1),3). put_variable(y(2),2). call(succ,2). put_unsafe_value(2,1)....

(call stack and choice points) Commonly, implementations start with a broken and inconsistent kind of immediate update view which still works for many uses. Then much later, they add some...

But, just to make this clear: This issue is not specific to Scryer at all. So changing the Scryer code will not help with this issue. Right?

Related to #302 What you can only expect (with reasonable effort) is the precise area of the complete clause. Everything else would imply a lot of extra work.

In fact, it also happens when consulting the file manually: ``` ulrich@p0:~/scryer$ /opt/gupu/scryer-prolog/target/release/scryer-prolog -f ?- [initialization]. error(existence_error(procedure,run/0),run/0). % unexpected true. ?- [initialization]. Warning: initialization/1 failed for: user:run % expected true....

It seems that some library that is not loaded somewhere needs to be loaded to get the effect. So instead of `debug` also `clpz` works, but `lists` does not produce...