From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01641BBBB for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2006 11:21:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k2DALU7o026037 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2006 11:21:30 +0100 Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA32556 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2006 11:21:29 +0100 (MET) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k2DALSWH002670 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2006 11:21:29 +0100 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1FIkAI-00050I-Q4 for caml-list@inria.fr; Mon, 13 Mar 2006 11:20:39 +0100 Received: from 67.71.115.9 ([67.71.115.9]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2006 11:20:38 +0100 Received: from monnier by 67.71.115.9 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2006 11:20:38 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: caml-list@inria.fr From: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: unification of alternatives Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 05:19:59 -0500 Message-ID: <873bhmabxo.fsf-monnier+gmane.comp.lang.caml.inria@gnu.org> References: <1142239620.8419.314.camel@budgie.wigram> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.71.115.9 User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:6mX/BlGiPzwGBI8BLxg6REFDVVI= Sender: news X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 441547AA.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 441547A8.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; umontreal:01 unification:01 unification:01 unify:01 unify:01 residual:98 algorithm:01 algorithm:01 constraint:01 substitution:02 constraints:03 programming:03 logic:04 problem:05 problem:05 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.6 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_BY_IP,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 > I have an interesting problem with unification algorithm. > The problem is basically that given two terms, > either that unify, they don't unify, or *NEW* they don't > unify yet but might later. I believe you're looking for something called "residualization" in constraint and logic programming: if the unification algorithm can return not just a substitution but also some residual constraints that it wasn't able to resolve (but which may be resolvable later). Stefan