Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc.

[Tom Lord]

    > From: Phil Frost <address@hidden>

    > Flamewar aside, I don't think restricting execution to a finite
    > number of steps means much of anything. All computers today are
    > not truly turing complete because they have limited storage.

Yes (sort of, under certain theories of cosmology) but some languages 
are defined in a way that makes it possible to express any program at
all in them and others are not.


    > Bounding execution to a finite number of steps doesn't make the
    > language any simpler either.

Oh, it certainly can.  You need only compare what it takes to
implement (true) regular expressions to what it takes to implement
Scheme.  For example, you don't need run-time allocation of storage
(or GC) to provide regular expressions.


    > All it does is make deep recursion or long loops impossible, and
    > place an upper bound on the computational power of the
    > program, but not the complexity of the language.

Both theory and history of practice contradict you.

-t