On 31 January 2014 17:13, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Thursday, January 30, 2014 10:32:02 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: >> >> It isn't *essential. *Technically, I believe I/O can be added to a >> computer programme as some sort of initial settings (for any given run of >> the programme). >> > > Added how though? By inputting code, yes? > All code has to be input. That isn't input TO the programme, however, it's setting up the programme before it is run. > > >> Obviously this isn't much use in practice, of course! But from a >> philosophical perspective it's possible, so it isn't ontologically >> essential to the function of computation. >> >> A trivial example would be my son's Python programme to generate 2000 >> digits of pi. It just uses some existing equation which generates each >> digit in sequence. It happens to write the output to the screen, but if he >> took out the relevant PRINT statement, it wouldn't - but it would still >> compute the result. >> > > The existing equation was input at some point though, and without the > output, whether or not there was a computation is academic (and > unfalsifiable). > That wasn't the point. The question was whether I/O is ontologically essential to the function of computation. Quite clearly, the answer is no. The function of computation *can* exist without any I/O, so that answers the question. I was just answering your question honestly and as accurately as I could. If you're going to change the question to something else when I attempt to answer it, I won't bother in future. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
