[m-dev.] for review: add promise_only_solution/1 to std_util.m

[Peter Schachte]

On Fri, Nov 06, 1998 at 04:30:48PM +1100, Fergus Henderson wrote:

> We already have a perfectly good way of promising at least one solution:
> 
> 	(if p(...) then ... else error("p failed")).

Fair enough.  I'd agree there's no need to implement the more general
facility I suggested right now.

When the time comes to make this a language facility understood by the
compiler, however, I still think the more general facility (with
cannot-fail promises implemented as you suggest above) would be
better, because its more orthogonal, and its simpler for promising
goals to be det or multi.


-- 
Peter Schachte                | The greater part of our happiness depends on
mailto:pets at cs.mu.OZ.AU       | our dispositions and not on our
http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~pets/ | circumstances.
PGP: finger pets at 128.250.37.3 |     -- Martha Washington