Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive"

From	Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc>
Newsgroups	comp.theory
Subject	Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive"
Message-ID	<20220502012600.000071ea@reddwarf.jmc> (permalink)
References	<20220501133707.00002134@reddwarf.jmc> <87mtg1tizc.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20220501171727.00003901@reddwarf.jmc> <87czgwu8av.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Organization	Jupiter Mining Corp
Date	2022-05-02 01:26 +0100

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, 02 May 2022 00:44:56 +0100
Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:

> Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> writes:
> 
> > On Sun, 01 May 2022 15:39:35 +0100
> > Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> >  
> >> Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> writes:
> >>   
> >> > Recursive definitions are fine, infinitely recursive definitions
> >> > (such as The Halting Problem) are INVALID.    
> >> 
> >> (1) The halting problem is not an infinitely recursive definition.
> >> 
> >> (2) Infinitely recursive definitions are often fine.  For example,
> >> the list of Fibonacci numbers:
> >> 
> >>   fibs = 1 : 1 : zipWith (+) fibs (tail fibs)  
> >
> > FOR FUCKS SAKE, HOW STUPID ARE YOU? THAT IS A RECURSIVE DEFINITION
> > NOT AN *INFINITELY* RECURSIVE DEFINITION AS IT TERMINATES.  
> 
> Look again.  What is the terminating condition?  There is none.
> 

It doesn't terminate because it is effectively an unbounded generator
however it will always terminate UPON USE (thunk evaluation) and this
usage is different to the infinitely recursive halting
problem definition which does not terminate.  There is no category error
here but there is a category error in the halting problem definition.

/Flibble

Thread

on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-01 13:37 +0100
  Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-01 15:39 +0100
    Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" polcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 11:05 -0500
      Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 13:14 -0400
      Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-02 00:50 +0100
    Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-01 17:17 +0100
      Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-02 00:44 +0100
        Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-02 01:26 +0100
          Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 18:29 -0600
            Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-02 01:31 +0100
          Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-02 01:49 +0100
  Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 13:08 -0400
    Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 12:23 -0500
      Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 14:04 -0400
    Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 11:30 -0600
      Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 14:10 -0400
      Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 13:33 -0500
        Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 12:43 -0600
          Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 14:05 -0500
            Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 13:19 -0600
              Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 14:24 -0500
                Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 13:35 -0600
                Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 14:43 -0500
                Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 13:45 -0600
                Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 14:56 -0500
                Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 15:49 -0400
                Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 15:43 -0400
            Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 12:21 -0700
              Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 14:27 -0500
                Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 15:52 -0400
              Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 14:10 -0700
                Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 02:53 -0700
                Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 08:31 -0500
                Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-02 15:46 +0100
                Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-02 18:43 -0400
            Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 15:27 -0400
        Re: on "infinitely recursive" and "recursive" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 15:13 -0400

csiph-web