If we are talking about equivalence to a turing machine -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine -- I do not think this is a meaningful distinction.
Thanks, -- Raul On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 3:51 PM Elijah Stone <elro...@elronnd.net> wrote: > > That is not quite right. We do not need to explicitly represent infinite > arrays; we only need array length to be unbounded, such that the length of > a given array can grow without bound (but finitely) over a finite amount > of time. See limit definition. > > -E > > On Tue, 8 Feb 2022, Raul Miller wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 4:30 AM Elijah Stone <elro...@elronnd.net> wrote: > >> Can anyone come up with something which does not require infinite arrays? > > > > Technically, any system which does not support infinite time and > > infinite space is not turing complete. > > > > That said, in most contexts, we take "infinite" to mean "larger than I > > need for the example(s) I am concerned about". > > > > FYI, > > > > -- > > Raul > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
