[m-dev.] Solvers, negation, existential quantification, and so forth

[Mark Brown]

On 02-Jun-2006, Peter Stuckey <pjs at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> Bascially you are almost always incomplete. only very special routines
> lead to completeness (labelling). Tracking this for the user is  
> difficult
> since its only labelling on all variables which guaranteed completeness

Is this a statement about the FD solver and similar solvers, or is this
a general statement about all solvers (or, all solvers we care about)?

That is, is it generally true that making all variables in a CP program
ground is sufficient to ensure that the program is solver complete for
main/2?

Is this a good "one size fits all" requirement that Mercury should expect
from all code that uses solver types?

(Cf. my earlier question "Is there any useful theory at all for solvers
in general?").

Cheers,
Mark.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-developers mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-developers-request at cs.mu.oz.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------