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
Subject: Re: Sequence of sequence, selection and iteration matters --- Ben
 agrees
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 07:24:33 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <96c4912952776b13821499416e070b562dbe8b27@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>
 <v6ilo7$19kmv$1@dont-email.me>
 <9353b62747ce599e737b541851b197460c8be63e@i2pn2.org>
 <v6le15$1qpm2$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 11:24:33 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2789540"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v6le15$1qpm2$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3108
Lines: 44

On 7/10/24 3:42 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-07-09 11:29:20 +0000, Richard Damon said:
> 
>> On 7/9/24 2:35 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 2024-07-09 01:30:01 +0000, Richard Damon said:
>>>
>>>> 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?
>>>
>>> If HHH is not a pure function it can have side effects while still
>>> running. A side effect can "report".
>>>
>>
>> But he keeps on insting that HHH *IS* a pure function, and that we are 
>> stupid if we forget that when he forgets to keep it in the description 
>> because HE is allowed to be sloppy, but we can't take benefit from that.
> 
> In such situations I may point out that OP did not require pure function
> (or whatever he forgot to require).
> 

Yes, he might make such a claim, but if you use the fact that did 
specify pure function that time to show him wrong he will answer that of 
course it must be a pure function, that has always been in the requirements.

IF it can report via non-pure methods, then it can short-cut the 
recursion with the static and be able to run to completion.

Either way, it is wrong.