[Fwd: building constraint systems]

Fri Nov 14 21:55:22 CET 2003

Why is this  message is being sent out over and over?

Daniel

Gustavo Adolfo Gutierrez Sabogal writes:
 > 
 > Return-path: <owner-oz-users at ps.uni-sb.de>
 > Received: from [134.96.7.3] (helo=indyio.rz.uni-saarland.de) by
 > 	escher.puj.edu.co with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1AK1Vm-0002yo-00;
 > 	Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:22:47 -0500
 > Received: from cs.uni-sb.de (cs.uni-sb.de [134.96.254.254]) by
 > 	indyio.rz.uni-saarland.de (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id hACKUTFX43514999;
 > 	Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:30:29 +0100 (CET)
 > Received: from mail.cs.uni-sb.de (mail.cs.uni-sb.de [134.96.254.200]) by
 > 	cs.uni-sb.de (8.12.10/2003091100) with ESMTP id hACKT7hV021983; Wed, 12 Nov
 > 	2003 21:30:11 +0100 (CET)
 > Received: from ps.uni-sb.de (grizzly.ps.uni-sb.de [134.96.186.68]) by
 > 	mail.cs.uni-sb.de (8.12.10/2003073000) with ESMTP id hACKRtkF016276; Wed,
 > 	12 Nov 2003 21:27:56 +0100 (CET)
 > X-Authentication-Warning: email: Host grizzly.ps.uni-sb.de [134.96.186.68]
 > 	claimed to be ps.uni-sb.de
 > Received: (from majordomo at localhost) by ps.uni-sb.de (8.11.6/8.11.0) id
 > 	hACKRC910911 for oz-users-internal; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:27:12 +0100
 > X-Authentication-Warning: grizzly.ps.uni-sb.de: majordomo set sender to
 > 	owner-oz-users at ps.uni-sb.de using -f
 > X-Authentication-Warning: uni-sb.de: Host [200.24.111.12] claimed to be
 > 	puj.edu.co
 > Subject: building constraint systems
 > From: Gustavo Adolfo Gutierrez Sabogal <ggutierrez at escher.puj.edu.co>
 > To: users at mozart-oz.org
 > Content-Type: text/plain
 > Message-Id: <1068667875.31218.18.camel at lucia.puj.edu.co>
 > Mime-Version: 1.0
 > X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 
 > Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:11:16 -0500
 > X-DCC-NIET-Metrics: uni-sb.de 1080; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
 > Sender: owner-oz-users at ps.uni-sb.de
 > Precedence: bulk
 > Reply-To: users at mozart-oz.org
 > Status: 
 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
 > 
 > Hello All, 
 > 
 > I'm trying to make some modifications to the RI module in order to
 > create a  constraint system a bit different. The RI module assumes that
 > floating point  numbers are the elements of the constraint system, in
 > the constraint system i am trying to build elements are real numbers;
 > since real numbers can't be  represented then i can say that the
 > elements of the constraint system are intervals. 
 > 
 > I am a bit familiar with the classes needed to implement a new
 > constraint system, according to the documentation those are: 
 > - A class extending OZ_CtDefinition 
 > - A class extending OZ_CtWakeUp 
 > - A class extending OZ_CtProfile 
 > - A class extending OZ_Ct 
 > - A class extending OZ_CtVar 
 > 
 > In the documentation you can find as example the Real Interval
 > constraint system and an explanation of the classes above. Also there
 > are some methods whose are not implemented in the module, for example
 > documentation describes the methods: 
 > virtual OZ_Ct * unify(OZ_Ct * r) 
 > virtual OZ_Boolean unify(OZ_Term rvt) 
 > but those methods are not implemented in the RI module. 
 > 
 > Looking at mozart sources, the class OZ_Ct, from RI class inherits,
 > doesn't have any virtual methods called 
 > virtual OZ_Ct * unify(OZ_Ct * r) 
 > virtual OZ_Boolean unify(OZ_Term rvt) 
 > but there is a *commented* class OZ_Ct declaring those methods. 
 > 
 > What do that means?, may be those methods are not needed or deprecated?
 > if that how Mozart unify two variables of the new constraint system? 
 > 
 > The RI module has float numbers as elements of the CS and OZ has the
 > basic type float for which it provides operations such OZ_isFloat,
 > OZ_floatToC, etc. 
 > 
 > What happen with a constraint system that do not have elements that can
 > be represented by a OZ basic type?, for example in my case, OZ doesn't
 > have the basic type interval, so what i need to return in the method
 > OZ_Term RI::toValue(void) ? 
 > I try to look at the FS implementation, but it seems that the class
 > FSetValue doesn't inherit from OZ_Ct. The class OZ_FSetValue has a
 > method called  
 > int oz_isFsetValue(TaggedRef t) which is used by the method OZ_Boolean
 > FSetValue::unify(OZ_Term t). Notice that FSetValue (in my opinion) is
 > analog to the RI class and the first one provides a unification method
 > but the second one don't. Why?? 
 > 
 > Is there any document presenting the Mozart design, may be a class
 > diagram or something like that? I am very interested in how FD and FS
 > are implemented. 
 > 
 > Thanks in advance for your answer and excuse me for the message length. 
 > 
 > Regards, 
 > Gustavo Gutierrez 
 > 
 > -
 > Please send submissions to users at mozart-oz.org
 > and administriva mail to users-request at mozart-oz.org.
 > The Mozart Oz web site is at http://www.mozart-oz.org/.
 > Please send bug reports to bugs at mozart-oz.org.

-
Please send submissions to hackers at mozart-oz.org
and administriva mail to hackers-request at mozart-oz.org.
The Mozart Oz web site is at http://www.mozart-oz.org/.