Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.programming
Subject: Re: Question about algorithm numerical domain
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 19:38:09 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <87d0ygr14e.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <8f53ddc2-e18b-4935-a2e5-1be81e1e04e6@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="75aa9f66fd91d0e03d6b777de0c51f70"; logging-data="13884"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+gFYI+MqOYyYKi3zn45R/chf49MinXNxU="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:lhxz0XMezL5hmYx7ahKqGjjIucE= sha1:Dx/P7X5admN7w1VoLmb9KivsUGw=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.21d66ad19cf1f7feed5a.20180430193809BST.87d0ygr14e.fsf@bsb.me.uk
Xref: csiph.com comp.programming:8736

programmernovice <ivandenisovich826@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi everyone. My book (Smith's "An Introduction to Goedel's Theorems")
> defines the numerical domain of an algorithm as the set of naturals
> that, when input individually to the algorithm, result in its
> "working", that is to terminate and output some result. In the book it
> is also stated that any wff of a programming language (e. g. C++) can
> be considered an algorithm, having a numerical domain.
>
> I'm not clear about how an instruction such as "Go To" can be
> considered an algorithm, or if it is, then how does one determine its
> numerical domain.

Quite.  But then it almost certainly does not come under the definition
of "WFF of a programming language".  A goto hidden in a function, f, is
OK because we can consider f(x) to be WFF with a numerical domain.

-- 
Ben.