Re: The naive test for equality

"vc" <boston103_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1123619409.376468.14900_at_g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> So now we have, in addition to 'representation', a new word 'symbol'.
> What is even worse, in your vocabulary, it means two different things.
> Nice..

Nonsense. The word "symbol" has been used to describe the numbers managed by a computer ever since Ada Lovelace commented on the possible uses of Babbage's analytical engine. Just because the IT world has forgotten its own history doesn't meant this stuff is new.

And, I'm using "symbol" with a consistent meaning, as far as I can see.

>
> >In other words, what the computer stores is all symbolic, right
> > down to the most atomic symbols, zero and one.
>
> This is not true. What the computer uses to store numbers (and
> characters) is called bits, not symbols. Besides, the way the
> computer implements numbers and characters is entirely irrelevant at
> the logical level.

Bits are symbols.

And what makes you think the logical level is the only level?

>
> >
> > When various "engines" (or "objects" if you prefer) inside a large
system
> > exchange data with each other (or "messages" if you prefer), they use
> > symbols to communicate with each other.
>
> This phrase is so ambiguous as to be almost devoid of meaning. What are
> "engines" and how do they "exchange data" ? What precisely do you mean
>
> Hardware components ? Abstract stuctures communicating using some
> protocol ? Or something else ?
>

All of the above.

I give up. Received on Wed Aug 10 2005 - 15:33:25 CEST