Comparison of Prolog implementations
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following comparison of Prolog implementations provides a reference for the relative feature sets and performance of different implementations of the Prolog computer programming language. A comprehensive discussion of the most significant Prolog systems is presented in an article published in the 50-years of Prolog anniversary issue of the journal Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).[1]
Portability
Systems with a dark gray background are not supported any more. Arrows denote influences and inspiration of systems. Quick legend: JIT = "Just in Time Compiler", JVM = "Java Virtual Machine", TOAM = "Tree-Oriented Abstract Machine"
There are Prolog implementations that are radically different, with different syntax and different semantics (e.g. Visual Prolog)[2] and sub-communities have developed around different implementations.[2]
Code that strictly conforms to the ISO-Prolog core language is portable across ISO-compliant implementations. However, the ISO standard for modules is an extension which was not fully adopted in most Prolog systems.[2][1]
Factors that can adversely affect portability include: use of bounded vs. unbounded integer arithmetic, additional types such as string objects, advanced numeric types (rationals, complex), feature extensions such as Unicode, threads, and tabling.[3] Use of libraries unavailable in other implementations and library organisation:[2]
Currently, the way predicates are spread over the libraries and system built-ins differs enormously. [...] Fortunately, there are only few cases where we find predicates with the same name but different semantics (e.g.
delete/3)
Main features
| Platform | Features | Toolkit | Prolog Mechanics | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | OS | Licence | Native Graphics |
Compiled Code |
Unicode |
Object Oriented |
Native OS Control |
Stand Alone Executable |
C Interface[a] |
Java Interface[a] |
Interactive Interpreter |
Debugger |
Code Profiler |
Syntax |
| AllegroProlog[4] | Unix, Windows, Mac OS X | Proprietary (limited free edition available) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes, via Lisp | Yes | Yes, via Lisp | Yes, via Lisp | Yes | Yes | Yes, via Lisp | S-expressions. Full Common Lisp integration. | |
| BProlog | Unix, Windows, Mac OS X | Proprietary (free for non-commercial uses) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog, plus event-handling, CLP(FD), and tabling | |
| Ciao | Unix, Windows, Mac OS X | GPL, LGPL | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog, plus extensions | ||
| DOS-Prolog[5] | MS-DOS | Proprietary | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Edinburgh Prolog | |||||
| ECLiPSe | Linux, Windows, Solaris, macOS | MPL | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Extended Prolog, Multi-dialect, including ISO | ||||
| GNU Prolog | Unix, Windows, Mac OS X | GPL, LGPL | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog | |||||
| JIProlog[6] | JVM, Android | AGPL (commercial support available) | Yes | Yes | Yes via Java | Yes | Yes via Java | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog | |||
| JLog[7] | JVM | GPL | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog | |||||||
| JScriptLog[7] | Web Browser | GPL | Yes | ISO-Prolog | ||||||||||
| jTrolog[8] | JVM | LGPL | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog | |||||||
| WIN-Prolog[9] | Windows | Proprietary | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Edinburgh Prolog with extensions |
| Open Prolog[10] | Mac OS System 7 | Freeware | Yes | |||||||||||
| Poplog Prolog | Linux (32- and 64-bit), Unix, Windows | Free Open Source | Only through POP-11, on Linux | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Edinburgh Prolog, with interfaces to Poplog Common Lisp and Pop-11 | ||||
| Scryer Prolog[11] | Linux, Windows, macOS | BSD License | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog | |||||||||
| SICStus Prolog | Unix, Linux, Windows, macOS | Proprietary | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog |
| Strawberry Prolog[12] | Unix, Windows | Freeware | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Not ISO-Prolog + extensions | ||||||
| SWI-Prolog | Unix, Linux, Windows, macOS | BSD License | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog, Edinburgh Prolog | |
| tuProlog[13] | JVM, Android | LGPL | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog | |||||
| Visual Prolog | Windows | Freeware | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |||
| XSB Prolog | Linux, Windows, Solaris, macOS | LGPL | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog, tabled WFS | ||
| YAP-Prolog | Linux, Windows, Solaris, Mac OS X, HP-UX | GPL or Artistic (user choice) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ISO-Prolog, Edinburgh Prolog, Quintus and SICStus Prolog compatible | |||
Operating system and web-related features
| OS-related | Web-related | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | Conditional compilation | Sockets | Multi-threading | Tabling | HTTP client | HTTP server | HTML Parser | RDF Triple store |
| BProlog | Yes | |||||||
| Ciao | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
| ECLiPSe | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |||
| GNU Prolog | Yes | |||||||
| WIN-Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||||
| Scryer Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |||
| SICStus Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | |||||
| SWI-Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Visual Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||
| XSB | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |||
| YAP-Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||||
Static analysis
| Name | Type checker | Determinacy checker | Call-pattern checker |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ciao | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| GNU Prolog | |||
| SICStus Prolog | Yes | ||
| SWI-Prolog | Yes | ||
| Visual Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| XSB | |||
| YAP-Prolog |
Optimizations
| Name | Tail-Call Optimization | Choice Point Elimination | Environment Trimming | Just-in-Time Indexing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ciao | Yes | Yes | Yes | ? |
| ECLiPSe | Yes | Yes | Yes | multi-argument (compile time) |
| GNU Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
| SICStus Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
| SWI-Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Visual Prolog | Yes (compile time) | Yes (compile time) | N/A | N/A (compile time) |
| XSB | Yes | Yes | Yes | ? |
| YAP-Prolog | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Release
| Name | Version | Date |
|---|---|---|
| AllegroProlog | 1.1.2 | 2018-12-12 |
| BProlog | 8.1 | 2014-02-23 |
| JIProlog | 4.1.7.1 | 2021-08-26 |
| Ciao | 1.25 | 2025-06-21[14] |
| DOS-Prolog | 8.0 | |
| ECLiPSe | 7.1 | 2023-01-01 |
| GNU Prolog | 1.5.0 | 2023-02-21 |
| JLog | 1.3.6 | 2007-09-13 |
| JScriptLog | 0.7.5 beta | 2007-09-10 |
| jTrolog | ||
| WIN-Prolog | 8.0 | 2022-07-14 |
| Open Prolog | ||
| Poplog Prolog | V16 | 2020-01-06 |
| Scryer Prolog | 0.10.0 | 2025-09-27[15] |
| SICStus Prolog | 4.9.0 | 2023-12-18 |
| Strawberry Prolog | 6.1 | 2023-08-23 |
| SWI-Prolog | 9.3.28 | 2025-08-08[16] |
| tuProlog | 2P-Kt 1.0.4 | 2024-05-26[17] |
| Visual Prolog | 10, Build 1000 | 2021-04-15 |
| XSB Prolog | 5.0 | 2022-05-15 |
| YAProlog | 7.1.0 | 2020-12-19 |
Benchmarks
- Benchmarking issues: Odd Prolog benchmarking, Performance differences.[18]
- Benchmarking software: older, Dobry's Benchmarks, Aquarius benchmark suite, (Bothe, 1990),[19] (Demoen et al. 2001), benchmark descriptions
- Benchmarking results: B-Prolog, SICStus, XSB,[20] SICStus vs Yap vs hProlog[21]
- Benchmarking results: Survey of java prolog engines by Michael Zeising
- Benchmarking results: OpenRuleBench yearly open-source benchmark of rule engines
Notes
- C/Java interface can also be used for graphics and OS control.