🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Nov20.100712.7550@nntp.nta.no> klaus@hal.nta.no (Klaus Gaarder FNI) writes:
>In article <722206613@pike.cs.duke.edu>, srt@duke.cs.duke.edu (Stephen R. Tate) writes:
>|> To re-iterate:  programs that cannot
>|> be counted on to halt are very, very, very rare.  Most people will never
>|> see one.
>
>Unless Mr Tate has a fairly restriced view of 'programs' I must say:
>
>"Surely you're joking Mr Tate?"...
>
>I DO hope my Unix instance never halts...so 
>in fact most computer users see a program never halting EVERY SINGLE DAY,
>namely their favourite OS!!

Ok, ok.  Several people have pointed things like this out to me.  But
remember the context of my comment.  We're talking about P vs. NP, and
algorithms for decision problems.  In other words, the entire point of
running the algorithm is to arrive at a single answer.  In fact, most
definitions of algorithm include the condition that the algorithm halt
in a finite amount of time.   An OS may not halt, but it's not a program
designed to get an answer, and is not in the least considered an
"algorithm" in the sense of algorithms studied for complexity theory.

I used the term "program" rather than algorithm trying to be informal,
and because it's what the original poster used.  I suppose it was a
mistake....


-- 
Steve Tate srt@cs.duke.edu | The reason why mathematics enjoys special esteem,
Dept. of Computer Science  | above all other sciences, is that its laws are
Duke University     | absolutely certain and indisputable, while those of all
Durham, NC  27706   | other sciences are to some extent debatable. (Einstein)