On Wednesday, August 3, 2016 at 12:53:02 AM UTC+5:30, Paul Rubin wrote: > Steven D'Aprano writes: > > where power is defined (rather fuzzily) as the expressiveness > > of the language, how easy it is for the programmer to read, write and > > maintain code, how efficient/fast you can implement it, etc. > > Scheme guru Matthias Felleisen takes a stab at a precise definition here > (though it's pointy-headed theory that I don't understand that well): > > http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.51.4656
Lovely! Thanks for that! [Been preparing some notes/thoughts for a Theory of CS course — v drafty : https://bitbucket.org/rustom/toc/wiki/themes — and had listed this (topic) as one of the big open problems] > > > The Halting Problem is easily solved for Bloop languages: they always > > halt. > > If Bloop is powerful enough to "solve the halting problem" as you > describe, that gives it capabilities that Turing-complete languages > lack. (Of course it also loses some capabilities). Some of the > advantages of Turing-incomplete languages (plus why they are less > constraining than it might sound) are discussed here: > > http://www.jucs.org/doi?doi=10.3217/jucs-010-07-0751 And thanks for that as well I had seen that decades ago but forgot waht to look for -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
