On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 16:54 +0000, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
3) Section 2.10.6:
Eric suggested to drop the following 2 paragraphs:
Implementations might even go so far as to ensure that scripts can
never execute an invalid set of actions before execution, although
this could involve solving the Halting Problem.
This specification allows any of these approaches. Solving the
Halting Problem is considered extra credit.
Eric said: solving the halting problem is not actually a problem with FSMs.
Any objections?
Does that mean I can drop haltingsolution.c from my implementation? ;-)
On a serious note, I rather like the humor here. Could we incorporate it
in a revision? Perhaps something like:
Implementations may go so far as to ensure that scripts can not be
activated or execute with an invalid set of actions. Because Sieve
is intentionally not Turing-complete, this involves only an FSM
generator and not a Halting Problem solver.
Aaron