I'm not sure what you're asking. The (untyped) lambda calculus is
Turing complete.
How could seq improve that?
On Feb 8, 2007, at 11:18 , Yitzchak Gale wrote:
Lennart Augustsson wrote:
I think seq is funny because it is not lambda definable.
Does the set of computable functions on the natural
numbers defined by the lambda calculus augmented
with seq have higher Turing degree than the
set of classical computable functions?
-Yitz
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
