Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.c > #168677

Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?)

Path csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?)
Date Tue, 27 Dec 2022 19:38:24 -0800
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Lines 52
Message-ID <86wn6curin.fsf@linuxsc.com> (permalink)
References <10655@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <1857@hubcap.UUCP> <8807121629.AA07169@explorer.dgp.toronto.edu> <2807@ttrdc.UUCP> <853b5253-ab29-4e38-9e81-a1d9312e5e2dn@googlegroups.com> <tn3gtv$1bht$1@gioia.aioe.org> <tn5emd$1uap$1@gioia.aioe.org> <86y1quwbc0.fsf@linuxsc.com> <87lemumdsj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <865ydyvwyq.fsf@linuxsc.com> <87y1qslrqw.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
MIME-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="38ac7d2bf94e0515b2526fa483f331a9"; logging-data="4075844"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+nlGYJmG3lLBktxYs99bYrq1el3fHNkaM="
User-Agent Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock sha1:okumJqv3T5FI0MfSc5slugyT2Lk= sha1:25Npzr60DeA1R6YdjAN8/enVo2s=
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.c:168677

Show key headers only | View raw


Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> writes:

[..pruning mercilessly..]

> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:

[.. concerning C being Turing complete ..]

> I think this is going to get messy because I contend that C
> (certainly freestanding C) already excludes an infinite number of
> computable functions because it's model is everywhere bounded.
> (Yes, I know we might want to consider IO to be essentially
> unbounded.)
>
> But that's a side issue!

Okay, I will ignore that question.

> I meant only that the kind of processing the example indulged in
> could be deemed invalid without affecting C's Turing completeness.
> You considered the program "large" in that it generated a huge
> post-processing input.  C could have declared such "large" programs
> to be invalid.

What I think you're saying here is C could disallow large
programs when the largeness comes mostly from macro expansion
(and so we don't need to consider the question of the language
being Turing complete).  I think that's right, although I'm not
sure if such a determination could be done cheaply enough;  the
cost of deciding when the limit is exceeded might be too high
to be practical.  Also I'm not sure how to define the property
in a precise way;  no doubt it could be done, but I suspect
making the definition precise would give a result that is
complicated and hard to understand.  (But I'm not asking for a
concrete proposal.)

If you're saying something else then I don't know what it is.


>> Incidentally, the processing time needed is irrelevant.  The
>> compiler will run out of memory long before it runs out of CPU
>> cycles.
>
> Yes.  "Compile-time costs" was supposed to mean costs (in terms
> of resources) incurred at compile time.

Oh, but this matters.  The amount of memory required to see if
the macro-processing-expansion limit is exceeded (even when it is
not) might be too large for a determination to be made.  Oops!

Have we made any progress towards understanding each other?  I
hope we have. :)

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) KP2 KP2 <jungletrain@outlook.com> - 2022-12-10 13:06 -0800
  Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-12-10 20:57 -0600
    Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-12-10 22:57 -0600
    Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2022-12-11 20:31 +0000
      Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Robert Latest <boblatest@yahoo.com> - 2022-12-12 14:39 +0000
        Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2022-12-13 12:15 +0000
        Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-12-13 16:23 +0000
      Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-12-26 05:20 -0800
        Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-12-26 14:37 +0000
          Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-12-26 10:30 -0800
            Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-12-27 16:45 +0000
              Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-12-27 19:38 -0800
                Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-12-29 02:09 +0000
                Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-12-29 19:56 -0800
  Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2022-12-11 20:12 +0000
    Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-12-12 14:33 -0600
      Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-12 21:12 +0000
        Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-12 16:09 -0800
  Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Jack Lemmon <invalid@invalid.net> - 2022-12-12 20:30 +0000
    Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-12-12 15:20 -0600
    Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2022-12-12 21:28 +0000
      Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-12 22:39 +0000
        Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2022-12-12 22:49 +0000
          Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) "minf...@arcor.de" <minforth@arcor.de> - 2022-12-31 04:01 -0800
        Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-12-12 15:56 -0800
          Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-13 14:55 +0000
            Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-13 16:26 +0100
        Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-13 14:50 +0100
        Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2022-12-13 18:56 +0300

csiph-web