Daniel Diaz

> > > A ... stands for a non-variable term. > > > > Interesting ? Do you have a reference for this definition ? > > When a variable...

Thanks for these pointers and for the test-set you provided. It helped me to improve my implementation on the emission of `...` inside lists. NB variables are still not treated...

What is the output of the following goal (try to reply before testing any system): ``` write_term(f(1,2,3),[max_depth(1)]). ``` All systems I have tried (including ciao, sisctus, ... exception is swi)...

> or a `...` for it all. NB: `...` does not respect the "replace the dots by variables and then `subsumes_term(Generalized, Original)` must hold". This remains testable (obviously not with...

``` | ?- write_term(f(1,2,3),[max_depth(1)]). f(...) yes | ?- subsumes_term(f(X),f(1,2,3)). no ```

Fixed. ``` | ?- nth0(I,[A+B+C+D,1+2+3+4,A^B^C^D^E,1^2^3^4^nil,[1,2,3,4],[A,B,C,D],[- -A,- -B,- -C,- -D],[[A,B,C,D]]],T), between(0,5,M), write(I-M), write(' '), write_term(T,[variable_names(['A'=A,'B'=B,'C'=C,'D'=D,'E'=E]),max_depth(M)]), nl, false. SICStus GNU 0-0 A+B+C+D 0-0 A+B+C+D 0-1 ... +D 0-1 ... +D 0-2 ......

ensure_loaded/1 is not yet implemented (it has some issues for a native compiler). gprolog proposes the ensure_linked/1 directive which could help you.

Turtle graphic is all about visual and intuitive. As I said, I have no problem with the current behavior when the turtle is shown since the behavior is graphically understandable....