Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!chaph.usc.edu!alcor.usc.edu!jeenglis From: jeenglis@alcor.usc.edu (Joe English) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: Halting Problem Solved! Film at 11! (Was Re: definitions) Message-ID: <17115@chaph.usc.edu> Date: 6 May 91 08:01:41 GMT References: <1991May4.192440.5527@sctc.com> <17088@chaph.usc.edu> Sender: news@chaph.usc.edu Organization: Free Roger Carasso! Lines: 33 Nntp-Posting-Host: alcor.usc.edu truesdel@nas.nasa.gov (David A. Truesdell) writes: >jeenglis@alcor.usc.edu (Joe English) writes: >>I have to agree that the halting problem doesn't apply to >>real computer programs, though. Many programs aren't >>*supposed* to halt on every input (interactive processes, >>network servers, etc.; these act like finite state transducers >>and theoretically *should* be able to run forever.) >What? You mean my text editor isn't supposed to exit when I'm done? (Well, >an editor is an interactive process, isn't it?) "Input" refers to everything >that is input into the process. Not individual lines, nor individual commands, >everything. A FSM representing an editor will have a halting state. Yeah, but that doesn't mean that it has to _reach_ the halt state. There are an infinite number of strings that don't end in 'q ', and "ed" won't halt on any of them.[*] The interesting question is not whether or not an editor will halt on all inputs. Looking at the problem this way is like looking at Emacs as a finite state machine accepting the regular expression ".*^X^C". What's interesting are questions like "If I invoke ESC-X towers-of-hanoi, will it finish?" [*] Actually, this isn't correct. In an editor if you simply stop typing, it will "halt", but not in an "accepting state" (returning to the operating system). --Joe English jeenglis@alcor.usc.edu