max_depth/1 option incorrect

[UWN]

There are two different objectives. One is that the output should be nice and consistent. That is desirable. But then there is a more fundamental issue: Sometimes the output is just incorrect. That is, the output cannot be used to (partially) reconstruct the original term. Here is such an example:

?- write_term_to_chars([[_|_]|_],[max_depth(1)],Chs).
   Chs = "[[...|[ ...]]|_2]", unexpected.
?- write_term([[_|_]|_],[max_depth(1)]).
[[...|[ ...]]|_2]   true, unexpected.

[infradig]

I know there are faults, as I said before it's in progress.

…

On Thu, 13 July 2023, 21:24 UWN, ***@***.***> wrote: There are two different objectives. One is that the output should be nice and consistent. That is desirable. But then there is a more fundamental issue: Sometimes the output is just incorrect. That is, the output cannot be used to (partially) reconstruct the original term. Here is such an example: ?- write_term_to_chars([[_|_]|_],[max_depth(1)],Chs). Chs = "[[...|[ ...]]|_2]", unexpected ?- write_term([[_|_]|_],[max_depth(1)]). [[...|[ ...]]|_2] true. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#261>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFNKSEUNKXPTZXLKXMOZW7LXP7LHBANCNFSM6AAAAAA2IZOEVY> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[UWN]

Back at this...