Re: Election 2008 for computer programmers

spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

On Sep 11, 12:43 am, Ben Bacarisse <ben.use...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
spinoza1111<spinoza1...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

<snip>

However, in formal language theory for computers, there is a crudely
unexpressive class of languages called "Chomsky 0",
<snip>
In these languages, there is no memory. Instead, the appearance of a
symbol
<snip>
switches the "parser",
human or machine, into a new state.

I think you have that the wrong way round.  The number 0 is usually
associated with the most expressive grammars (usually called Type 0).
Type 3 grammars are one that can be thought of as having no memory --
their languages are recognised by finite state automata.


I believe the Hopcroft Ullman taxonomy was

type zero: regular
type two: regular two way
type three: LIFO stack
type 4: you need a Turing machine

No -- this is just misremembering. It is exactly the other way round.

Of course, just as there's nothing "before" my type zero, there's
nothing "after" a Turing machine: in fact, the book took pains to show
that no matter what sort of mechanisms and gizmos you add to a TM, a
plain old Turing machine could simulate it. I suppose the numbering
could go either way, and I no longer have the book. I prefer calling
it type 0 because zeroness expresses stupidity here.

It expresses your desire to use term without regard for common
practise. You are free to do so, but it will cause confusion in a
technical group.

But henceforth,
based on your post, I shall always qualify my usage in political
writings that make reference to this comment, and you are welcome
based on your higher and more recent knowledge to post correct
information.

You need to qualify it with the fact that you made it up.

--
Ben.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The wisdom of the object mentors (Was: Searching OO Associations with RDBMS Persistence Models)
    ... Java is object oriented by any reasonable definition of the term. ... OOPL, functions must be objects, is not valid. ... In most languages, they are statements, so not something that can be ... functions be objects to qualify an as OOPL. ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: Election 2008 for computer programmers
    ... their languages are recognised by finite state automata. ... nothing "after" a Turing machine: in fact, the book took pains to show ... The point is we need to understand politics at a higher level ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: Election 2008 for computer programmers
    ... associated with the most expressive grammars. ... their languages are recognised by finite state automata. ... nothing "after" a Turing machine: in fact, the book took pains to show ... As to getting around to implementing Spinoza, ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: Scripting question, [small programming question
    ... Let us know if you need more work proofreading and ... > any OO programming construct that is not available from these languages? ... Since Some OS's have been written in PCODE type language ... interpreted languages would not qualify. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: BASIC is still the best programming language!!!
    ... Richard Heathfield wrote: ... It is possible to implement a Turing machine in BASIC (or at ... least, as possible as it is in languages such as Ada, C, Dylan, ...
    (comp.programming)