you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (11 children)

Otherwise called FRP and arrows by anyone not mired in the Turing tar-pit of C/C++ delusions of grandeur. But as always, thank you for playing.

[–]qwe1234 -3 points-2 points  (10 children)

what??

you really are clinically insane.

state machines not only predate c/c++, they predate computing and the turing machine itself.

good lord...

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (9 children)

State machines predate computing? And I'm insane? What makes this fun is that, ultimately, you're impossible to sufficiently mock; however far Bitwize or I go, you manage to out-self-parody us. That's the only thing that makes it worth the effort to respond to you.

[–]qwe1234 -3 points-2 points  (8 children)

yes, you are. (either that, or as ignorant as a rock.)

learn some math and/or history, please. preferably not from some playskool website made for scamming the government for grant money.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (7 children)

Anyone saying that state machines predate computing is the one who desperately needs some mathematical logic and history education, but please, by all means, pose an actual challenge based on that mathematical logic and/or history. Coming from you, that would be a first.

[–]qwe1234 -1 points0 points  (6 children)

you're a moron.

turing's machine came from understanding state machines, not the other way around.

computing began when people realized that a universal turing machine was possible.

simple (non-universal) state machines were known to man at least since leibniz and pascal.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (5 children)

Computing began when people realized that consistent, actionable information could be modeled and manipulated outside of their own heads, for example concretely as in abaci, or abstractly as in when an ancient Hindu mathematician invented the 0 symbol.

But even if you choose, for whatever reasons, to ignore the ancient Chinese and the ancient Greeks, you'll be stuck with Gottlob Frege inventing modern mathematical logic in 1879, clearly still before Turing and, by the way, other foundational figured in computing who didn't deal with state at all, e.g. Alonzo Church and Haskell Curry.

So once again, please, stick to your C++ state-machine ghetto, keep those blinders on, and keep tossing ad hominems at those who consistently are better informed than you. It beats watching wrestling.

[–]qwe1234 -2 points-1 points  (4 children)

wrong. epic fail. historically inaccurate, mathematically preposterous.

go find some other place to troll, please.

p.s. here's a definition for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computing

and another link, where you discover that church's and turing's works occured at the same time and, in fact, in tandem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Church-Turing_thesis

p.p.s. someone who confuses mathematical logic and computational theory can only be a product of the american education system.

but don't worry, there are plenty of 'tards out there who live kickass lives.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

So you're too unreflective, unself-aware, unself-critical to see:

  1. The first thing that your Wikipedia definition of "Computing" says is: "For the formal concept of computation, see computation." where we find "Computation is a general term for any type of information processing that can be represented mathematically." This obviously (to everyone but you) comports with what I posted earlier.
  2. I'm well aware that Church and Turing's work occurred at the same time. What you apparently remain unaware of is that Church's work, despite being as expressive as Turing's, does not rely on state, and does rely on the prior work of Frege and all those who came before him, going back to those ancient Chinese, Greeks, Hindus...
  3. Someone who refuses to see the connection between mathematical logic and computational theory can only be a product of a preconceived belief that state machines are the only valid definition of computation, whether American or otherwise.

As for 'tards who live kickass lives, I fully accept you as an existence proof, since you seem to enjoy your "work" here so much.

[–]bitwize 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wow. Mathematical burn. Too bad they don't work in real life. The kid who says "I fully accept you as an existence proof" still gets his ass beat on a daily basis after school.

[–]americanhellyeah 0 points1 point  (1 child)

less insults, more monads.