[|]’and [] 
for lists
Representing lists the conventional way using ./2'[]' as list terminator both 
(independently) pose conflicts, while these conflicts are easily 
avoided.
./2a.B cannot be 
distinguished from [a|B]. Freeing ./2
'[]' as list terminator prevents dynamic 
distinction between atoms and the empty list. As a result, we cannot use 
type polymorphism that involve both atoms and lists. For example, we 
cannot use multi lists (arbitrary deeply nested lists) of 
atoms. Multi lists of atoms are in some situations a good representation 
of a flat list that is assembled from sub sequences. The alternative, 
using difference lists or DCGs, is often less natural and sometimes 
requires‘opening’proper lists (i.e., copying the list while 
replacing the terminating atom '[]' with a variable) that 
have to be added to the sequence. The ambiguity of atom and list is 
particularly painful when mapping external data representations that do 
not suffer from this ambiguity.
At the same time, avoiding atom '[]' as a list 
terminator makes the various text representations unambiguous, which 
allows us to write predicates that require a textual argument to accept 
any of atoms, strings, lists of character codes or characters. 
Traditionally, the empty list, as an atom, is afflicted with an 
ambiguous interpretation as it can stand for any of the strings "[]" 
and
"".