Dan Rose

Also note ISO/IEC 13211-2 7.4.1.1, 6.5.2.2. ~~If `asserta/1` is executed in the calling context of module `M`, then the body would (I think) be `(M:call(X), M:call(X))`, so usually `(user:call(X), user:call(X))`.~~...

> SICStus: > > ``` > | ?- asserta((f(X) :- X,X)). > yes > | ?- clause(f(X),Body). > Body = (call(X),call(X)) ? ; > no > ``` I don’t know...

It looks like I misread and that regular goal expansion is supposed to apply when the body is unqualified. I think I wrongly extrapolated from the first example in ISO/IEC...

Thanks! I was about to file an issue with TypeScript - don't know why I couldn't find it :-). I don't know what the expectation is here - the `babel-eslint`...

I can reproduce the original issue on MacOS: ``` ?- use_module(library(files)). true. ?- path_segments(A,["/Users/me"]). A = "/Users/me". ?- path_segments("/Users/me",["/Users","me"]). false. ``` Related to #2939, namely that `path_segments/2` treats slashes in...

@UWN > (comments on steadfastness later) > > ``` > ?- P=[_|_],path_segments(P,["a","b"]). > error(instantiation_error,must_be/2), unexpected. > P = "a/b" % expected under Linux > | P = "a\\b". % expected...

> Now for steadfastness. Consider: > > ``` > foo(x) :- !. > foo(y). > > ?- foo(X). > X = x. % that is the output value > ?-...

> > Yes, that means it's steadfast per the definition I was using. > > And that is the problem. (I assumed my rhetorical question is clear here). `foo/1` is...

This is a useful discussion and there is much wisdom in your words but I don't think I understand: 1. I claim that `path_segments` is poorly behaved and ought to...

> Relational, monotonic, steadfast. I have no idea what you are trying to communicate by this. > Steadfastness 3.3.21 was already defined Okay. That definition does not define steadfastness of...