Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!hubcap!ncrcae!usceast!park
From: park@usceast.UUCP (Kihong Park)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: reasons why you don't proof your programs are correct
Message-ID: <3052@usceast.UUCP>
Date: 14 Jan 90 17:08:18 GMT
Reply-To: park@usceast.uucp.UUCP (Kihong Park)
Organization: University of South Carolina, Columbia
Lines: 11

>In article <1990Jan12.030424.1397@world.std.com> bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:
>>The halting problem states (very roughly) "There exists at least one
>>program who's halting conditions cannot be determined".
>In article <1596@castle.ed.ac.uk> arshad@lfcs.ed.ac.uk (Arshad Mahmood) writes:
>>No there are uncountably many of them.

What does Arshad Mohmood mean there are uncountably many of them? The set of
halting and non-halting turing machines forms a countably infinite set. 

I haven't read his posting, and hence I'm not sure if he is not referring to
something else by "them".