From: Arets Paeglis (astronfo@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Oct 13 2009 - 21:06:25 MDT
More so, the concept of "prior point" does not need to be directly
related to a prior point in user's interaction with the program (as
would be in the scenario with MS Word), such as undoing changes or
reverting to older set of data. By definition, it means some prior
state during the program's execution flow, the simplest and most
trivial example being any cyclical operator:
for (i = 1; i < 10; i++)
{
i = x; // during the cycle, execution flow will return 10 times to
this state
do_something(i);
do_something_else(i);
}
Additionally, I do disagree with the notion that any algorithm is
necessarily either halting or representing an infinite loop.
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 5:50 AM, John K Clark <johnkclark@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 "Bradley Thomas" <brad36@gmail.com said:
>
>> *My point is that any real algorithm in any real computer is
>> automatically in an infinite loop.
>> In the sense that it has to return to a prior state sooner or later
>
> What on earth are you talking about? You start the Microsoft Word
> program and write a novel with. When you are finished the program does
> not "have" to return to the original state it was in before you started
> writing, as a matter of fact I think you'd be a little annoyed at
> Microsoft if it did.
>
> John K Clark
>
>
>
> --
> John K Clark
> johnkclark@fastmail.fm
>
> --
> http://www.fastmail.fm - A no graphics, no pop-ups email service
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:04 MDT