Performance Comparison between Conventional and Logic Programming Systems
|
Descargar SCORM
Este recurso ha sido solicitado 1 veces (0 veces en los últimos 31 días).
Para poder solicitar este recurso debe identificarse como usuario de la biblioteca
|
| |
Ver
Detalles del recurso
|
|
|
Performance Comparison between Conventional and Logic Programming Systems
|
| Id. |
46455981 |
| Idioma |
inglés
|
| Titulo |
Performance Comparison between Conventional and Logic Programming Systems |
| Autor(es) |
Vanusa Menditi Calegario
Inês de Castro Dutra
|
| Localización |
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.35.1002
|
| Versión |
1.0 |
| Estado |
Final
|
| Descripción |
This work compares and analyses conventional and logic programming systems using a qualitative and quantitative approach. Logic programming is known to be easier and simpler than imperative programming, but it is not very popular because of its believed inefficiency. Our work shows that logic programming can be as efficient as imperative programming for a wide range of symbolic and scientific applications. We used different Prolog-based systems, including SICStus, XSB, Yap, CLP(R) and Aurora and compared to C, a structured language. We focus our studies on programmability, execution times and memory usage, and show that the use of techniques such as compilation, code specialization, tabling, constraints and parallelisation can improve the performance of declarative systems allowing them to behave better than imperative systems. Our best result shows that a logic program can run 200 times faster than its correspondent in C. Keywords: logic programming, conventional programming, program...
|
| Tipo |
application/postscript
|
| Palabras clave |
logic programming
|
| Tipo de recurso |
Texto Narrativo
|
| Tipo de Interactividad |
Expositivo
|
| Nivel de Interactividad |
muy bajo
|
| Audiencia |
Estudiante
Profesor
Autor
|
| Estructura |
Atomic |
| Coste |
no
|
| Copyright |
sí
|
|
Metadata may be used without restrictions as long as the oai identifier remains attached to it. |
| Formatos |
application/postscript
|
| Requerimientos técnicos |
Browser: Any
|
| Relación |
[IsBasedOn] ftp://www.cos.ufrj.br/pub/tech_reps/es47898.ps.gz
[References] 10.1.1.22.7079
[References] 10.1.1.39.7696
[References] 10.1.1.109.5315
[References] 10.1.1.48.5182
[References] 10.1.1.50.4703
[References] 10.1.1.36.8790
[References] 10.1.1.49.7495
[References] 10.1.1.30.6003
[References] 10.1.1.53.2913
[References] 10.1.1.43.1801
[References] 10.1.1.34.8186
[References] 10.1.1.16.2681
|
| Fecha de contribución |
28-jul-2009 |
| Contacto |
|
|
|
|
|
Valoración de los usuarios
No hay ninguna valoración para este recurso. Sea el primero en
valorar este recurso.
|
|
|
|
