4 ms·
Darn, I thought this was going to be a WASM runtime that runs on the N64.
by jordemort 5y ago
Darn, I thought this was going to be a WASM runtime that runs on the N64.
- mdonahoe 5y agoIf we had that, how many n64 implementations could we stack? More generally, what’s the most nested Turing machine ever built?
- d33 5y agoYou might love this article from page 14 of PoC||GTFO #20: https://www.alchemistowl.org/pocorgtfo/pocorgtfo20.pdf https://www.alchemistowl.org/pocorgtfo/pocorgtfo20.pdf (warning: it's a relatively big PDF file, which also works as a .zip file with resources)
- andi999 5y agoZero. No Turing machine has ever been built. The tape needs to be infinite to be a Turing machine.
- atoav 5y agoGP probably meant something among the lines of: "What is the most nested turing complete system ever built"
- mdonahoe 5y agoYou are correct, this is what I meant. I've found "self-interpreter" implementations that aim to be short https://arxiv.org/html/cs/0311032 https://arxiv.org/html/cs/0311032 https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/585/self-interpreting-interpreter https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/585/self-interp... But I haven't found anyone yet that optimized for actual number of recursive implementations on a real machine.
- astrange 5y agoCan you prove that statement in finite time?
- emteycz 5y agoWhat's the problem with adding more tape as needed? You don't need a literally infinite tape to have infinite tape from the machine's POV.
- throwawayninja 5y agoLinux already overcommits memory so much you can imaging it's infinite, the big show-stopper is the 64 bit integers used to track it. We'd need infinite pointer sizes before we could meaningfully use infinite tape.