Re: The wisdom of the object mentors
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 19:11:14 GMT
Message-ID: <mpfog.3020$pu3.72994_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> Enumeration is not an algorithm. Presumably you're talking about
> (ignore some terminological vagueness here) mapping a function to nodes
> of some structure. Enumeration just gets you to each node. The function
> still has to operate on the node, and type issues are critical.
> Furthermore, the results have to be accumulated; another "part" of the
> algorithm.
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 19:11:14 GMT
Message-ID: <mpfog.3020$pu3.72994_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
erk wrote:
>>Enumeration was just an example of an algorithm for which I, an ignorant, >>stupid imbecile, if that would please you, can't even imagine what the data >>could be. Even less I can imagine what is a structure of. Further it is >>utterly incomputable [infinite, requires axioms of choice and power set >>etc.]
>
> Enumeration is not an algorithm. Presumably you're talking about
> (ignore some terminological vagueness here) mapping a function to nodes
> of some structure. Enumeration just gets you to each node. The function
> still has to operate on the node, and type issues are critical.
> Furthermore, the results have to be accumulated; another "part" of the
> algorithm.
I suspect he was talking about countability of countable infinite sets. He might have a point after he invents the infinite computer.
> Certainly functional combinators are important and useful, and many
> functional languages do a bang-up job (and for a great read, check out
> John Backus's 1977 Turing Award lecture paper). "Enumeration" is just a
> tiny piece.
>
> - erk
Received on Tue Jun 27 2006 - 21:11:14 CEST