Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!pioneer!eugene
From: eugene@pioneer.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Universal Programming Languge (was: Universal OS)
Message-ID: <8679@ames.arc.nasa.gov>
Date: 12 May 88 21:07:11 GMT
References: <769@imagine.PAWL.RPI.EDU> <76700017@uiucdcsp> <843@actnyc.UUCP> <3558@psuvax1.psu.edu> <4039@killer.UUCP> <4723@ihlpf.ATT.COM>
Sender: usenet@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Reply-To: eugene@pioneer.UUCP (Eugene N. Miya)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
Lines: 24
Posted: Thu May 12 17:07:11 1988

In article <4723@ihlpf.ATT.COM> nevin1@ihlpf.UUCP (00704a-Liber,N.J.) writes:
>In article <4039@killer.UUCP> loci@killer.UUCP (loci!clb) writes:
>>Computers are mathematical, and operate best on these problem,
>This is a common fallacy, that computers are inherently mathematical.
>Mathematics is simply one way of abstracting what a computer does.

Actually, if you restricted math to use ASCII [just alphanumeric and a
few other characters], imposed many limitations which would mimic
"storage," "execution time [speed math, your theorems must be proved
quickly],"  "compile" it, you could get math to look to look a lot like
computers.  [Knuth, Mar. 1985 AMM? Mathematicians know the value of
everything and the cost of nothing modified from Perlis's Epigrams].
Consider doing math with $int$ $sum from i = 1 to inf$, etc.  Certainly
doable, but I am only aware of a few systems which can evaluate 2^72-1
(certainly all systems with bc) and this is just a small integer 8-).
This is part of the beauty of math as well as a limitation.

Another gross generalization from

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@aurora.arc.nasa.gov
  resident cynic at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers:
  "Mailers?! HA!", "If my mail does not reach you, please accept my apology."
  {uunet,hplabs,hao,ihnp4,decwrl,allegra,tektronix}!ames!aurora!eugene
  "Send mail, avoid follow-ups.  If enough, I'll summarize."