On 7/3/2026 5:51 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:On 2026-07-03 16:37, olcott wrote:On 7/3/2026 1:47 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:>On 2026-07-03 12:36, olcott wrote:>On 7/3/2026 1:18 PM, dbush wrote:>>If an algorithm takes an input and produces an output, that is by definition a mapping.That only proves that the definition is incoherent.
The coherent way that it actually works is that
inputs are transformed into outputs by applying
finite string transformation rules to inputs to
derive outputs.
Apparently you don't understand the difference between a mapping and an algorithm. They are two different things.
>
André
>
A function that ignores its input and only returns 0
is not any sort of halt function.
He was defining 'mapping', not 'halt function'.
>
André
A actual halt function must compute the mapping fromA function does not compute. An algrothm may compute a function.
its actual input according to the operational semantics
of this input to the behavior that this input actually
specifies. No function can report on the behavior of
its caller because it has no idea who its caller is.
However, no algrithm computes the halt function.
The halt functions maps a computation to a truth value
but so do many other functions, too.
--
Mikko
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.