implementations. It is not supposed to include definitions which it would
require infinite resources to compute, since we want to create an
executable notation.


Do you always know if a definition takes finite resources?

I don't understand the note about edge cases. There is a problem with most
programs we write in that they can not handle all cases. We don't know for
sure that they will always give correct results. That is a problem we want
to address.


Is this what you mean by "control" in your original email?
How will your work differ from the work done on other "proven" languages?


Cheers,
Erling Hellenäs


On 2017-08-09 09:47, Raul Miller wrote:

> Your 2 prohibits your algebra from being completely implemented as a
> programming language (since you have to support whatever you are going
> to describe before you can use that in specifications, and because
> computers have finite resources). So you are talking about a notation,
> and not an implementation. But hypothetically speaking, you could use
> J as a notation which is independent of any specific implementation.
> (You presumably would want to specify whichever edge cases mattered to
> you, when you do this.)
>
> Generally speaking, though, mathematical logic deals with infinities
> and other future equivalencies.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to