SPF Turing completeness

| > I thought that (in the absence of the "processing limits" section in the
| > specification) SPF might be Turing complete.
| 
| Good point.  If SPF turns out to be turing complete, then the spec should
| require a recursion limit.

My goodness.  If someone with qualifications in computer science could
provide a proof of Turing completeness I would love to see it.  Until
then, I suggest that speculation on this subject is not fruitful.

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
SPF competitor: DVP, Stuart D. Gathman Re: SPF competitor: DVP, Tony Finch Re: SPF competitor: DVP, Stuart D. Gathman SPF Turing completeness, Meng Weng Wong <= SPF competitor: DVP, Roger Moser SV: SPF competitor: DVP, Lars Dybdahl RE: SPF competitor: DVP, Jeremy Pullicino Re: SPF competitor: DVP, Meng Weng Wong RE: SPF competitor: DVP, Seth Goodman RE: SPF competitor: DVP, Stuart D. Gathman RE: SPF competitor: DVP, James Couzens RE: SPF competitor: DVP, Stuart D. Gathman RE: SPF competitor: DVP, David Brodbeck SV: SPF competitor: DVP, Lars Dybdahl

Previous by Date:	Re: SPF competitor: DVP, Stuart D. Gathman
Next by Date:	Re: "valid since" addition to SPF?, Meng Weng Wong
Previous by Thread:	Re: SPF competitor: DVP, Stuart D. Gathman
Next by Thread:	SPF competitor: DVP, Roger Moser
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]