Timeline for What makes a language Turing-complete?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10, 2022 at 22:52 | comment | added | naught101 | Isn't imperative point 1. actually two parts? Conditional branching, and the ability to loop/move? | |
| Aug 9, 2017 at 17:41 | comment | added | Solomon Slow | Re, "every useful language has a way of interacting with the world." Algol 60 did not have any defined way of interacting with the world. All of your I/O in an Algol 60 program was done by calling library functions, and the library functions could be completely different in different implemenations. But, I hereby recuse myself from any discussion of whether or not Algol 60 was "useful." | |
| S Aug 9, 2017 at 15:03 | history | suggested | Fraser | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Fixed broken links |
| Aug 9, 2017 at 14:46 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Aug 9, 2017 at 15:03 | |||||
| Feb 23, 2017 at 2:15 | comment | added | sergiol | Isn't it required the language must support ENDLESS loops? | |
| Jan 13, 2014 at 18:07 | comment | added | user40980 | @luiscubal you need to be able to specify an arbitrary amount of data. With simple variables you can represent the amount of data that the variables themselves have. What if you need to represent N+1 different pieces of data. One could argue that with tricks like Fractran plays, you could do it even in simple variables... but that's not quite what you're asking. | |
| Jan 12, 2014 at 23:08 | comment | added | luiscubal | For imperative languages, are simple variables enough? I was under the impression that some kind of collection (e.g. arrays or linked lists) would be necessary. | |
| Mar 29, 2013 at 9:44 | history | edited | Jon Purdy | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Add x86 MMU TC link. |
| Feb 27, 2013 at 3:13 | history | edited | Jon Purdy | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 17 characters in body |
| Jan 29, 2012 at 20:05 | history | answered | Jon Purdy | CC BY-SA 3.0 |