Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Sequence of sequence, selection and iteration matters --- Ben
 agrees
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2024 22:08:20 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <84f47ef5a956cee40068951f5f09f1b13405a622@i2pn2.org>
References: <v6e7va$c4sv$1@dont-email.me> <v6g444$pdc2$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6go4d$sg7f$1@dont-email.me>
 <80ebfd233bf599468126ddf048190bd0799605bd@i2pn2.org>
 <v6htmc$12ktu$1@dont-email.me>
 <dcd1b46e5442c8a532a33873f396b9cb9b0688a5@i2pn2.org>
 <v6hvps$12ktu$3@dont-email.me>
 <cf764821d8b9b08443fc6cd3d285bc0567f31fa6@i2pn2.org>
 <v6i1if$12ktu$6@dont-email.me>
 <17da0ceefca3bfd4f06a789d24ad13ee55146692@i2pn2.org>
 <v6i4an$13ejf$4@dont-email.me>
 <9230f3ba65ba4424b908878855c7d15785fda294@i2pn2.org>
 <v6i5k1$13ejf$5@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 02:08:20 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2621132"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <v6i5k1$13ejf$5@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 3663
Lines: 57

On 7/8/24 10:00 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 7/8/2024 8:53 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 7/8/24 9:38 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 7/8/2024 8:30 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 7/8/24 8:51 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 7/8/2024 7:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/8/24 8:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When you need groceries you cannot say that you
>>>>>>> don't need groceries until AFTER you get more groceries.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which is just Red Herring, as I am not a program, and the program 
>>>>>> is not me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Free will does not make lies into truth.
>>>>> If HHH reports that DDD does not need to abort
>>>>> DDD before HHH aborts DDD then HHH is a liar.
>>>>
>>>> How can HHH "report" something while it is still running?
>>>>
>>>
>>> The way that IT DOES report something while it is still
>>> running. You love to disagree with verified facts.
>>>
>>
>> Computation can not report answers while running.
>>
>> YOu are just showing your stupidity.
> 
> Thus printf() does not exist.
> 

For Turing Machines and the like, no, not in that sense.

Think of it as the output is spooled to a buffer that isn't released 
until the program ends.

Yes, modern computers can do some "things" that Turing Machines and 
Computations can not, but they can not "Compute" by the meaning of the 
word in the field something that the Turing Machine can not do.

Tbhe key point is that the next program taking the output of the program 
can not know if that is all of its input until the running program says 
it is done, and Conputation Theory is about comptations do things that 
can feed other computations, so no output is done and fully usable until 
the program generating it stops.

If you define that the first thing that HHH "prnts" is its answer and it 
is done after that, then when DDD "calls" HHH, it resumes as soon as HHH 
sends that output, and it doesn't need to "wait" for HHH to stop 
running, as it has, as far as the calling DDD is concerned when HHH 
completes its answer.

Think of it as a cross process pipe instead of a call instruction, as 
that is what you are starting to try to define with early output.