Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 10:11:38 -0700 From: Chris Pressey <cpressey@catseye.mine.nu> To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Beginning C++ in FreeBSD Message-ID: <20040428101138.38e25081.cpressey@catseye.mine.nu> In-Reply-To: <20040428163104.GA10537@Shark.localdomain> References: <20040425215837.3f4708fe.cpressey@catseye.mine.nu> <20040426094335.GA7578@online.fr> <20040426115842.GA4144@Shark.localdomain> <xzphdv5wq2q.fsf@dwp.des.no> <20040427160737.GA1325@Shark.localdomain> <xzpr7u918jv.fsf@dwp.des.no> <20040428023920.GA382@Shark.localdomain> <xzpfzao18gd.fsf@dwp.des.no> <20040428163104.GA10537@Shark.localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 20:31:04 +0400 Sergey Zaharchenko <doublef@tele-kom.ru> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 04:30:10PM +0200, > Dag-Erling Sm=D0=ACrgrav probably wrote: > > Sergey Zaharchenko <doublef@tele-kom.ru> writes: > > > If the thesis sounds like > > > > > >> Any algorithm that can be written in one Turing-complete language > > >can> be written in another Turing-complete language. > > > > > > then I think I understand it. > >=20 > > No. A language is Turing-complete if it can be used to implement a > > universal Turing machine. What you quote is merely a consequence of > > Turing-completeness, not its definition. > >=20 >=20 > OK. >=20 > If I take out every word about main() from C's specification (making > it an ordinary function), will the resulting `language' stay > Turing-complete? Not AFAIK. > If not, why? You no longer have a start state. -Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040428101138.38e25081.cpressey>