ciao VS scryer-prolog

Some Prolog systems (like Ciao Prolog https://github.com/ciao-lang/ciao/blob/master/core/lib/forei...) implement bidirectional foreign interfaces. Once you have C bindings it is easy to write bindings from Rust, C++, or any other language (that can interoperate with C). I give here some details about Ciao because this is the system I know better but it should be similar for other popular Prolog implementations.

The tradeoffs depend on the complexity of the Prolog code and your needs for performance and features: pure LP, Prolog (search+unification+cut), garbage collection, dynamic database updates, constraint domains, etc. The Ciao Prolog engine is around 300-400KB. Adding a few libraries, compiler, etc. it goes to 2MB. Naive Prolog systems can be one order of magnitude smaller at the cost of sacrificing ISO compatibility, performance, etc. Note that "performance" can be very misleading. Some Prolog programs may run particularly fast in some Prolog system and very badly in others.

thank you! the scryer community deserves much of the credit too. everyone is welcome and encouraged to join us at https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog! some exciting plans in the pipe

Djot is the markup syntax that is used for the documentation of Scryer Prolog, using a parser written in Prolog:

https://github.com/aarroyoc/djota

It works well so far. One of the few limitations I noticed so far pertains to the formatting of tables. For instance, consider the table used in library(format) to describe control sequences:

https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog/blob/b0566e41503a6c8d...

It contains several entries that span multiple lines, yet are meant to denote only a single row of the table, such as:

    % | `~Nr`    |  where N is an integer between 2 and 36: format the            |