Comparison of Prolog implementations
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.
Portability[]
There are Prolog implementations that are radically different, with different syntax and different semantics (e.g. Visual Prolog)[1] and sub-communities have developed around different implementations.[1]
Code that strictly conforms to the ISO-Prolog core language is portable across ISO-compliant implementations. However, the ISO standard for modules was never accepted by most Prolog implementors.[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.[2] Use of libraries unavailable in other implementations and library organisation:[1]
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)
Main features[]
| Platform | Features | Toolkit | Prolog Mechanics | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | OS | Licence | Native Graphics | Compiled Code | Unicode | Object Oriented | Native OS Control | Stand Alone Executable | C Interface[3] | Java Interface[3] | Interactive Interpreter | Debugger | Code Profiler | Syntax |
| AllegroProlog | Unix, Windows, Mac OS X | Commercial, 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 | 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 | MS-DOS | Shareware | 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 | |||||
| JVM, Android | Shareware/Commercial and AGPL | Yes | Yes | Yes via Java | Yes | Yes via Java | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog | ||||
| JLog | JVM | GPL | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog | |||||||
| JScriptLog | Web Browser | GPL | Yes | ISO-Prolog | ||||||||||
| jTrolog | JVM | LGPL | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog tests[permanent dead link] | |||||||
| LPA-PROLOG | Windows | Commercial | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Edinburgh Prolog with extensions |
| Open Prolog | Mac OS | 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 | ||||
| SICStus Prolog | Unix, Linux, Windows, macOS | Commercial | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
| Windows, Unix | Freeware, Commercial | 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 | |
| JVM, Android | LGPL | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog | ||||||
| Visual Prolog | Windows | Freeware, Commercial | 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 | Edinburgh, ISO-Prolog, Quintus and SICStus Prolog compatible | |||
[]
| 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 | |||||||
| 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 | ||||
Static analysis[]
| 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 |
Optimizations[]
| 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 |
Release[]
| Name | Version | Date |
|---|---|---|
| AllegroProlog | 1.1.2 | 2018-12-12 |
| BProlog | 8.1 | 2014-02-23 |
| 4.1.6.1 | 2018-03-17 | |
| Ciao | 1.20.0 | 2021-03-31 |
| DOS-PROLOG | 6.0 | |
| ECLiPSe | 7.0_54 | 2020-02-26 |
| GNU Prolog | 1.4.5 | 2018-07-14 |
| JLog | 1.3.6 | 2007-09-13 |
| JScriptLog | 0.7.5 beta | 2007-09-10 |
| jTrolog | ||
| LPA-PROLOG | 7.0 | 2019-12-19 |
| Open Prolog | ||
| Poplog Prolog | V15.65 | 2015-10-14 |
| SICStus Prolog | 4.7.0 | 2021-08-09 |
| 3.0 Beta 4 | 2013-12-10 | |
| SWI-Prolog | 8.4.1 | 2021-11-16 |
| 3.2.1 | 2017-02-14 | |
| Visual Prolog | 10, Build 1000 | 2021-04-15 |
| XSB Prolog | 4.0 | 2021-04-01 |
| YAProlog | 6.3.3 | 2013-01-21 |
Benchmarks[]
- Benchmarking issues: Odd Prolog benchmarking, Performance differences.[4]
- Benchmarking software: older, Dobry[permanent dead link], Aquarius benchmark suite, (Bothe, 1990),[5] (Demoen et al. 2001), benchmark descriptions
- Benchmarking results: B-Prolog, SICStus, XSB,[6] SICStus vs Yap vs hProlog[7]
- Benchmarking results: Survey of java prolog engines by Michael Zeising
- Benchmarking results: OpenRuleBench yearly open-source benchmark of rule engines
References[]
- ^ a b c d Wielemaker, J.; Costa, V. T. S. (2011). "On the Portability of Prolog Applications". Practical Aspects of Declarative Languages. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 6539. p. 69. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.1030.9396. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-18378-2_8. ISBN 978-3-642-18377-5.
- ^ Jan Wielemaker and Vıtor Santos Costa: Portability of Prolog programs: theory and case-studies. CICLOPS-WLPE Workshop 2010.
- ^ a b C/Java interface can also be used for graphics and OS control.
- ^ 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)
- ^ Bothe, K. (1990). "A prolog space benchmark suite". ACM SIGPLAN Notices. 25 (12): 54–60. doi:10.1145/122193.122197.
- ^ A Summary of XSB Performance (1993)
- ^ Demoen, 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.
External links[]
- Overview of Prolog Systems by Ulrich Neumerkel
- Conformity assessment I: Syntax
Categories:
- Prolog programming language family
- Software comparisons