comp.theory

Liste des Groupes Pages :123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233
Date Sujet#  Auteur
16 May 25   i`* Re: How could HHH report on the behavior of its caller?2olcott
17 May 25   i `- Re: How could HHH report on the behavior of its caller?1Mikko
16 May 25   `* Re: How could HHH report on the behavior of its caller?3Richard Damon
16 May 25    `* Re: How could HHH report on the behavior of its caller?2olcott
16 May 25     `- Re: How could HHH report on the behavior of its caller?1Richard Damon
15 May 25 * Re: Why Peter Olcott is both right and wrong8Ben Bacarisse
16 May 25 +* Re: Why Peter Olcott is both right and wrong2Richard Heathfield
16 May 25 i`- Re: Why Peter Olcott is both right and wrong1Ben Bacarisse
16 May 25 `* Re: Why Peter Olcott is both right and wrong5Ben Bacarisse
16 May 25  `* Re: Why Peter Olcott is both right and wrong4olcott
16 May 25   +* Re: Why Peter Olcott is both right and wrong2olcott
17 May 25   i`- Re: Why Peter Olcott is both right and wrong1Richard Damon
17 May 25   `- Re: Why Peter Olcott is both right and wrong1Richard Damon
16 May 25 * Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met13olcott
16 May 25 +* Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met3Richard Damon
17 May 25 i`* Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met2olcott
17 May 25 i `- Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met1Richard Damon
16 May 25 `* Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met9Mike Terry
16 May 25  `* Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met8olcott
16 May 25   `* Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met7Richard Damon
16 May 25    `* Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met6olcott
16 May 25     `* Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met5Richard Damon
16 May 25      +* Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met2olcott
17 May 25      i`- Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met1Richard Damon
16 May 25      `* Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met -- wrong words2olcott
17 May 25       `- Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met -- wrong words1Richard Damon
10 May 25 * What it would take...143Richard Heathfield
10 May 25 +* Re: What it would take...10Richard Damon
10 May 25 i+* Re: What it would take...2Richard Damon
10 May 25 ii`- Re: What it would take...1Richard Damon
10 May 25 i`* Re: What it would take...7olcott
10 May 25 i +- Re: What it would take...1Fred. Zwarts
10 May 25 i `* Re: What it would take...5wij
10 May 25 i  `* Re: What it would take...4olcott
10 May 25 i   +* Re: What it would take...2olcott
10 May 25 i   i`- Re: What it would take...1Richard Damon
11 May 25 i   `- Re: What it would take...1Mikko
12 May 25 +* Re: What it would take...130Ben Bacarisse
12 May 25 i+* Re: What it would take...121Richard Heathfield
13 May 25 ii+* Re: What it would take...118Ben Bacarisse
13 May 25 iii+* Re: What it would take... TO GET MY REVIEWERS TO PAY COMPLETE ATTENTION?4olcott
13 May 25 iiii+- Re: What it would take... TO GET MY REVIEWERS TO PAY COMPLETE ATTENTION?1dbush
13 May 25 iiii+- Re: What it would take... TO GET MY REVIEWERS TO PAY COMPLETE ATTENTION?1Richard Damon
13 May 25 iiii`- Re: What it would take... TO GET MY REVIEWERS TO PAY COMPLETE ATTENTION?1Mikko
13 May 25 iii+* Re: What it would take...16Richard Heathfield
13 May 25 iiii`* How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met15olcott
13 May 25 iiii +* Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met8Richard Heathfield
13 May 25 iiii i`* Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met7olcott
13 May 25 iiii i +- Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met1dbush
13 May 25 iiii i +- Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met1Richard Heathfield
13 May 25 iiii i +* Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met3Richard Damon
13 May 25 iiii i i`* Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met2olcott
13 May 25 iiii i i `- Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met1Richard Damon
13 May 25 iiii i `- Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met1Mikko
13 May 25 iiii +* Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met5Richard Damon
13 May 25 iiii i`* Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met4olcott
13 May 25 iiii i `* Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met3Richard Damon
14 May 25 iiii i  `* Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met2olcott
14 May 25 iiii i   `- Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met1Richard Damon
13 May 25 iiii `- Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met1Fred. Zwarts
13 May 25 iii`* Re: What it would take...97Mike Terry
13 May 25 iii +- Re: What it would take...1Richard Heathfield
13 May 25 iii +* Re: What it would take...8olcott
13 May 25 iii i+* Re: What it would take...5Richard Heathfield
13 May 25 iii ii+* Re: What it would take...2olcott
13 May 25 iii iii`- Re: What it would take...1Richard Damon
13 May 25 iii ii`* Re: What it would take...2olcott
13 May 25 iii ii `- Re: What it would take...1Richard Damon
13 May 25 iii i+- Re: What it would take...1Richard Damon
13 May 25 iii i`- Re: What it would take...1Mikko
13 May 25 iii `* Re: What it would take...87André G. Isaak
13 May 25 iii  `* Re: What it would take...86olcott
13 May 25 iii   `* Re: What it would take...85Fred. Zwarts
13 May 25 iii    `* Re: What it would take...84Mike Terry
13 May 25 iii     `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric83olcott
13 May 25 iii      +* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric74dbush
13 May 25 iii      i+* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric52olcott
13 May 25 iii      ii+* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric50dbush
13 May 25 iii      iii`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP49olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii +* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP47dbush
14 May 25 iii      iii i`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP46olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i +* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP44dbush
14 May 25 iii      iii i i`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP43olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP42dbush
14 May 25 iii      iii i i  `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP41olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i   `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP40dbush
14 May 25 iii      iii i i    `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP39olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i     `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP38dbush
14 May 25 iii      iii i i      `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP37olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i       `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP36dbush
14 May 25 iii      iii i i        `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP35olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i         +* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP6dbush
14 May 25 iii      iii i i         i`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP5olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i         i +* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP3Fred. Zwarts
14 May 25 iii      iii i i         i i`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP2olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i         i i `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP1dbush
14 May 25 iii      iii i i         i `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP1dbush
14 May 25 iii      iii i i         `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP28Richard Heathfield
14 May 25 iii      iii i i          `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP27olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i           `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP26Richard Heathfield
14 May 25 iii      iii i i            `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP25olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i             `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP24Richard Heathfield
14 May 25 iii      iii i i              `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP23olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               +* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP21Richard Heathfield
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               i`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP20olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               i +* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP18Richard Heathfield
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP17olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i +* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP11Richard Heathfield
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i i`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP10olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i i +* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP8Richard Heathfield
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i i i`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP7olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i i i `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP6Richard Heathfield
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i i i  `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP5olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i i i   `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP4dbush
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i i i    `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP3olcott
15 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i i i     `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP2Fred. Zwarts
16 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i i i      `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP1olcott
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i i `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP1dbush
16 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP5joes
16 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i  `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP4olcott
16 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i   `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP3Richard Damon
16 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i    `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP2olcott
16 May 25 iii      iii i i               i i     `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP1Richard Damon
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               i `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP1joes
14 May 25 iii      iii i i               `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP1joes
14 May 25 iii      iii i `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP1Richard Damon
14 May 25 iii      iii `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP1Richard Damon
14 May 25 iii      ii`- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric1Richard Damon
13 May 25 iii      i`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric21Richard Heathfield
13 May 25 iii      i +* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric9dbush
13 May 25 iii      i i`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric8Richard Heathfield
13 May 25 iii      i i `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric7Mike Terry
13 May 25 iii      i i  +- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric1wij
13 May 25 iii      i i  `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric5olcott
14 May 25 iii      i i   +* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric3Fred. Zwarts
14 May 25 iii      i i   i`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric2olcott
14 May 25 iii      i i   i `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric1dbush
14 May 25 iii      i i   `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric1Richard Damon
13 May 25 iii      i `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric11olcott
13 May 25 iii      i  +* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric3Richard Heathfield
13 May 25 iii      i  i`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric2olcott
14 May 25 iii      i  i `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric1Fred. Zwarts
14 May 25 iii      i  +- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric1dbush
14 May 25 iii      i  `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric6Richard Damon
14 May 25 iii      i   `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric5olcott
14 May 25 iii      i    `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric4Richard Heathfield
14 May 25 iii      i     `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric3olcott
14 May 25 iii      i      `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric2Richard Heathfield
14 May 25 iii      i       `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric1olcott
13 May 25 iii      +* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric7olcott
14 May 25 iii      i+- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric1Fred. Zwarts
14 May 25 iii      i`* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric5Richard Damon
14 May 25 iii      i `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric4olcott
15 May 25 iii      i  `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric3Richard Damon
15 May 25 iii      i   `* Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric2olcott
15 May 25 iii      i    `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric1Richard Damon
13 May 25 iii      `- Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric1Richard Damon
13 May 25 ii`* Re: What it would take...2Mike Terry
13 May 25 ii `- Re: What it would take...1Richard Heathfield
12 May 25 i`* Re: What it would take...8Andy Walker
12 May 25 i +- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met1olcott
13 May 25 i +- Re: What it would take...1wij
13 May 25 i +- Re: What it would take...1Richard Heathfield
13 May 25 i +* Re: What it would take...3Richard Heathfield
13 May 25 i i`* Re: What it would take...2Richard Heathfield
13 May 25 i i `- Re: What it would take...1Richard Heathfield
13 May 25 i `- Re: What it would take...1Andy Walker
12 May 25 `* Re: What it would take...2olcott
13 May 25  `- Re: What it would take...1Fred. Zwarts
14 May 25 * What. A. Slog.24vallor
14 May 25 +* Re: What. A. Slog.2olcott
15 May 25 i`- Re: What. A. Slog.1Richard Damon
14 May 25 +* Re: What. A. Slog.20Mike Terry
14 May 25 i+* The exact words of this spec are met2olcott
15 May 25 ii`- Re: The exact words of this spec are met1Richard Damon
14 May 25 i`* Re: What. A. Slog.17Mike Terry
14 May 25 i `* HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification16olcott
14 May 25 i  +* Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification7dbush
14 May 25 i  i+- Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification1olcott
14 May 25 i  i`* Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification5olcott
14 May 25 i  i +- Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification1dbush
15 May 25 i  i `* Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification3Mikko
16 May 25 i  i  `* Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification2olcott
16 May 25 i  i   `- Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification1Mikko
15 May 25 i  `* Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification8Richard Damon
15 May 25 i   `* Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification7olcott
15 May 25 i    +* Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification5Richard Damon
15 May 25 i    i`* Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification4olcott
15 May 25 i    i +* Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification2Fred. Zwarts
16 May 25 i    i i`- Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification1Mikko
15 May 25 i    i `- Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification1Richard Damon
15 May 25 i    `- Re: HHH(DDD) correctly determines the halt status of its input according to this specification1Richard Heathfield
15 May 25 `- Re: What. A. Slog.1Mikko
15 May 25 * Re: Why Peter Olcott is both right and wrong2Richard Damon
16 May 25 `- Re: Why Peter Olcott is both right and wrong1Mikko
15 May 25 * Re: Why Peter Olcott is both right and wrong3Mikko
16 May 25 +- Re: Why Peter Olcott is both right and wrong1Richard Damon
16 May 25 `- Re: Why Peter Olcott is both right and wrong1Mikko
21 Apr 25 * Re: Refutation of Turing’s 1936 Halting Problem Proof Based on Self-Referential Conflation as a Category (Type) Error450Keith Thompson
22 Apr 25 +* Re: Refutation of Turing’s 1936 Halting Problem Proof Based on Self-Referential Conflation as a Category (Type) Error442olcott
22 Apr 25 i+- Re: Refutation of Turing’s 1936 Halting Problem Proof Based on Self-Referential Conflation as a Category (Type) Error1Richard Damon
25 Apr 25 i`* Re: Refutation of Turing’s 1936 Halting Problem Proof Based on Self-Referential Conflation as a Category (Type) Error440olcott
25 Apr 25 i +* Re: Refutation of Turing’s 1936 Halting Problem Proof Based on Self-Referential Conflation as a Category (Type) Error195Richard Damon
25 Apr 25 i i`* Re: Refutation of Turing’s 1936 Halting Problem Proof Based on Self-Referential Conflation as a Category (Type) Error194olcott
25 Apr 25 i i +* Re: Refutation of Turing’s 1936 Halting Problem Proof Based on Self-Referential Conflation as a Category (Type) Error192joes
26 Apr 25 i i i`* Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs191olcott
26 Apr 25 i i i +- Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1dbush
26 Apr 25 i i i +* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs188joes
26 Apr 25 i i i i`* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs187olcott
26 Apr 25 i i i i +* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs185Fred. Zwarts
26 Apr 25 i i i i i`* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs184olcott
26 Apr 25 i i i i i +- Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1dbush
26 Apr 25 i i i i i +* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs181Richard Damon
26 Apr 25 i i i i i i`* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs180olcott
26 Apr 25 i i i i i i +* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs172dbush
26 Apr 25 i i i i i i i`* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs171olcott
26 Apr 25 i i i i i i i `* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs170dbush
27 Apr 25 i i i i i i i  `* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs169olcott
27 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   +* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs137dbush
27 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i`* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs136olcott
27 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i +* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs134dbush
27 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i i+* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs132olcott
27 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii+* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs5dbush
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i iii`* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs4olcott
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i iii +- Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1joes
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i iii +- Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1Richard Damon
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i iii `- Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1dbush
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii+- Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1Richard Damon
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii`* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs125Fred. Zwarts
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii `* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs124Richard Heathfield
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii  `* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs123olcott
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   +* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs15dbush
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i`* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs14olcott
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i +* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs11dbush
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i i`* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs10olcott
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i i +* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs7dbush
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i i i`* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs6olcott
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i i i +* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs4dbush
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i i i i`* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs3olcott
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i i i i +- Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1dbush
29 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i i i i `- Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1Richard Damon
29 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i i i `- Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1Richard Damon
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i i +- Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1Fred. Zwarts
29 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i i `- Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1Richard Damon
29 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i `* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs2Richard Damon
29 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i  `- Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1Richard Heathfield
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   +- Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1joes
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   +* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs104Richard Heathfield
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i`* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs103olcott
28 Apr 25 i i i i i i i   i ii   i +* Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs14dbush

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal