13.4 KB · ⇊ 8 parts · ⤓ Micron 13.4 KB · ⤓ HTML 76.1 KB

top

The following Comparison of Prolog implementations provides a reference for the relative feature sets and performance of different implementations of the Prolog computer programming language. A comprehensive discussion of the most significant Prolog systems is presented in an article published in the 50-years of Prolog anniversary issue of the journal Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).cite-ref-prolog50-1-0[1]

• Portability

• Main features

• Operating system and web-related features

• Static analysis

• Optimizations

• Release

• Benchmarks

• Notes

• References

• External links

There are Prolog implementations that are radically different, with different syntax and different semantics (e.g. Visual Prolog)cite-ref-portability2011-2-0[2] and sub-communities have developed around different implementations.cite-ref-portability2011-2-1[2]

Code that strictly conforms to the ISO-Prolog core language is portable across ISO-compliant implementations. However, the ISO standard for modules is an extension which was not fully adopted in most Prolog systems.cite-ref-portability2011-2-2[2]cite-ref-prolog50-1-1[1]

Factors that can adversely affect portability include: use of bounded vs. unbounded integer arithmetic, additional types such as string objects, advanced numeric types (rationals, complex), feature extensions such as Unicode, threads, and tabling.cite-ref-3[3] Use of libraries unavailable in other implementations and library organisation:cite-ref-portability2011-2-3[2]

Currently, the way predicates are spread over the libraries and system built-ins differs enormously. [...] Fortunately, there are only few cases where we find predicates with the same name but different semantics (e.g. delete/3)

| Platform | Platform | Platform | Features | Features | Features | Features | Features | Features | Features | Features | Toolkit | Toolkit | Toolkit | Prolog Mechanics |

|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

| Name | OS | Licence | Native Graphics | Compiled Code | Unicode | Object Oriented | Native OS Control | Stand Alone Executable | C Interface [ a ] | Java Interface [ a ] | Interactive Interpreter | Debugger | Code Profiler | Syntax |

| AllegroProlog [ 4 ] | Unix , Windows , Mac OS X | Proprietary (limited free edition available) | | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes, via Lisp | Yes | Yes, via Lisp | Yes, via Lisp | Yes | Yes | Yes, via Lisp | S-expressions. Full Common Lisp integration. |

| BProlog | Unix , Windows , Mac OS X | Proprietary (free for non-commercial uses) | | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog, plus event-handling, CLP(FD), and tabling |

| Ciao | Unix , Windows , Mac OS X | GPL , LGPL | | Yes | | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog, plus extensions |

| DOS-Prolog [ 5 ] | MS-DOS | Proprietary | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Yes | Yes | | | | Yes | | Edinburgh Prolog |

| ECLiPSe | Linux , Windows , Solaris , macOS | MPL | | Yes | | | Yes | | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Extended Prolog, Multi-dialect, including ISO |

| GNU Prolog | Unix , Windows , Mac OS X | GPL , LGPL | | Yes | | | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Yes | Yes | | ISO-Prolog |

| JIProlog [ 6 ] | JVM , Android | AGPL (commercial support available) | Yes | | Yes | | Yes via Java | Yes | Yes via Java | Yes | Yes | Yes | | ISO-Prolog |

| JLog [ 7 ] | JVM | GPL | Yes | Yes | | | | | | Yes | Yes | | | ISO-Prolog |

| JScriptLog [ 7 ] | Web Browser | GPL | | | | | | | | | Yes | | | ISO-Prolog |

| jTrolog [ 8 ] | JVM | LGPL | | | Yes | | | | | Yes | Yes | Yes | | ISO-Prolog |

| WIN-Prolog [ 9 ] | Windows | Proprietary | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Edinburgh Prolog with extensions |

| Open Prolog [ 10 ] | Mac OS System 7 | Freeware | | | | | | | | | | Yes | | |

| Poplog Prolog | Linux (32- and 64-bit), Unix , Windows | Free Open Source | Only through POP-11 , on Linux | Yes | | | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Yes | Yes | | Edinburgh Prolog, with interfaces to Poplog Common Lisp and Pop-11 |

| Scryer Prolog [ 11 ] | Linux , Windows , macOS | BSD License | | | Yes | | | | | | Yes | | | ISO-Prolog |

| SICStus Prolog | Unix , Linux , Windows , macOS | Proprietary | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog |

| Strawberry Prolog [ 12 ] | Unix , Windows | Freeware | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Yes | | | | Yes | | Not ISO-Prolog + extensions |

| SWI-Prolog | Unix , Linux , Windows , macOS | BSD License | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog, Edinburgh Prolog |

| tuProlog [ 13 ] | JVM , Android | LGPL | Yes | | Yes | | | | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | ISO-Prolog |

| Visual Prolog | Windows | Freeware | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Yes | Yes | |

| XSB Prolog | Linux , Windows , Solaris , macOS | LGPL | | Yes | Yes | | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog, tabled WFS |

| YAP-Prolog | Linux , Windows , Solaris , Mac OS X , HP-UX | GPL or Artistic (user choice) | | Yes | Yes | | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | ISO-Prolog, Edinburgh Prolog, Quintus and SICStus Prolog compatible |

| | OS-related | OS-related | OS-related | OS-related | Web-related | Web-related | Web-related | Web-related |

|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

| Name | Conditional compilation | Sockets | Multi-threading | Tabling | HTTP client | HTTP server | HTML Parser | RDF Triple store |

| BProlog | | | | Yes | | | | |

| Ciao | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |

| ECLiPSe | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Yes | | Yes | |

| GNU Prolog | | Yes | | | | | | |

| WIN-Prolog | | Yes | | | Yes | Yes | Yes | |

| Scryer Prolog | | Yes | | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |

| SICStus Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | | | |

| SWI-Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |

| Visual Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Yes | Yes | Yes | |

| XSB | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | |

| YAP-Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | | |

| Name | Type checker | Determinacy checker | Call-pattern checker |

|---|---|---|---|

| Ciao | Yes | Yes | Yes |

| GNU Prolog | | | |

| SICStus Prolog | | Yes | |

| SWI-Prolog | | Yes | |

| Visual Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes |

| XSB | | | |

| YAP-Prolog | | | |

| Name | Tail-Call Optimization | Choice Point Elimination | Environment Trimming | Just-in-Time Indexing |

|---|---|---|---|---|

| Ciao | Yes | Yes | Yes | ? |

| ECLiPSe | Yes | Yes | Yes | multi-argument (compile time) |

| GNU Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | |

| SICStus Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | |

| SWI-Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |

| Visual Prolog | Yes (compile time) | Yes (compile time) | N/A | N/A (compile time) |

| XSB | Yes | Yes | Yes | ? |

| YAP-Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |

| Name | Version | Date |

|---|---|---|

| AllegroProlog | 1.1.2 | 2018-12-12 |

| BProlog | 8.1 | 2014-02-23 |

| JIProlog | 4.1.7.1 | 2021-08-26 |

| Ciao | 1.22 | 2022-09-28 |

| DOS-Prolog | 8.0 | |

| ECLiPSe | 7.1 | 2023-01-01 |

| GNU Prolog | 1.5.0 | 2023-02-21 |

| JLog | 1.3.6 | 2007-09-13 |

| JScriptLog | 0.7.5 beta | 2007-09-10 |

| jTrolog | | |

| WIN-Prolog | 8.0 | 2022-07-14 |

| Open Prolog | | |

| Poplog Prolog | V16 | 2020-01-06 |

| Scryer Prolog | 0.9.3 | 2023-11-02 |

| SICStus Prolog | 4.9.0 | 2023-12-18 |

| Strawberry Prolog | 6.1 | 2023-08-23 |

| SWI-Prolog | 9.1.18 | 2023-11-01 |

| tuProlog | 2P-Kt 0.31.18 | 2023-10-24 |

| Visual Prolog | 10, Build 1000 | 2021-04-15 |

| XSB Prolog | 5.0 | 2022-05-15 |

| YAProlog | 7.1.0 | 2020-12-19 |

• Benchmarking issues: Odd Prolog benchmarking, Performance differences.cite-ref-15[14]

• Benchmarking software: older, Dobry's Benchmarks, Aquarius benchmark suite, (Bothe, 1990),cite-ref-16[15] (Demoen et al. 2001), benchmark descriptions

• Benchmarking results: B-Prolog, SICStus, XSB,cite-ref-17[16] SICStus vs Yap vs hPrologcite-ref-18[17]

• Benchmarking results: Survey of java prolog engines by Michael Zeising

• Benchmarking results: OpenRuleBench yearly open-source benchmark of rule engines

cite-note-c-41. C/Java interface can also be used for graphics and OS control.

cite-note-prolog50-11. ↑ citerefphilipp-k-rnermichael-leuscheljo-o-barbosav-tor-santos-costa2022Philipp Körner; Michael Leuschel; João Barbosa; Vítor Santos Costa; Verónica Dahl; Manuel V. Hermenegildo; Jose F. Morales; Jan Wielemaker; Daniel Diaz; Salvador Abreu; Giovanni Ciatto (November 2022), "Fifty Years of Prolog and Beyond", Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 22 (6): 776–858, doi:10.1017/S1471068422000102, hdl:10174/33387

cite-note-portability2011-22. ↑ citerefwielemakercosta2011Wielemaker, J.; Costa, V. T. S. (2011). "On the Portability of Prolog Applications". Practical Aspects of Declarative Languages. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 6539. pp. 69–83. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.1030.9396. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-18378-2_8. ISBN 978-3-642-18377-5.

cite-note-33. ↑ Jan Wielemaker and Vıtor Santos Costa: Portability of Prolog programs: theory and case-studies. CICLOPS-WLPE Workshop 2010 Archived 2010-07-16 at the Wayback Machine.

cite-note-52. Allegro Prolog

cite-note-63. "DOS-Prolog 8.0". Logic Programming Associates. 5 November 2023.

cite-note-74. JIProlog

cite-note-jlog-homepage-85. "JLog Homepage". jlogic.sourceforge.net. Retrieved 2023-11-03.

cite-note-96. "Jtrolog — Java.net". 2012-11-13. Archived from the original on 2012-11-13. Retrieved 2023-11-03.

cite-note-107. "WIN-Prolog 8.0". Logic Programming Associates. 5 November 2023.

cite-note-118. Open Prolog Home Page

cite-note-129. Scryer Prolog

cite-note-1310. Strawberry Prolog

cite-note-1411. tuProlog

cite-note-1514. ↑ B. Demoen, and P. Nguyen, About unnecessary performance differences between Prolog implementations, Proceedings of the Colloquium on Implementation of Constraint and Logic Programming Systems (CICLOPS 2001)

cite-note-1615. ↑ citerefbothe1990Bothe, K. (1990). "A prolog space benchmark suite". ACM SIGPLAN Notices. 25 (12): 54–60. doi:10.1145/122193.122197.

cite-note-1716. ↑ A Summary of XSB Performance (1993)

cite-note-1817. ↑ citerefdemoennguyenvandeginste2002Demoen, B.; Nguyen, P. L.; Vandeginste, R. (2002). "Copying Garbage Collection for the WAM: to Mark or Not to Mark?". Logic Programming. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 2401. pp. 194–208. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.13.2586. doi:10.1007/3-540-45619-8_14. ISBN 978-3-540-43930-1.

• Overview of Prolog Systems by Ulrich Neumerkel

• Conformity assessment I: Syntax