3 ms·
I think you're being overly reductive: > Using Rogers' characterization of acceptable programming systems, Rice's theorem may essentially be generalized from T
by Ygg2 3y ago
I think you're being overly reductive:
> Using Rogers' characterization of acceptable programming systems, Rice's theorem may essentially be generalized from Turing machines to most computer programming languages: there exists no automatic method that decides with generality non-trivial questions on the behavior of computer programs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice%27s_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice%27s_theorem
- arxanas 3y agoI don't understand why you say that my comment is reductive. It's adding nuance to the topic at hand, rather than removing it. The original comment talks about a situation where we constrain ourselves to "rigid types"; the child comment remarks on Rice's theorem having consequences for the analysis of general Turing machines; and I remind the commenter that we have already restricted ourselves to Turing machines satisfying some type system. Another way to express the same point of view is to say that I am arguing that the Curry-Howard isomorphism is more relevant to the situation at hand than Rice's theorem. (This might be the "promise" that the original commenter was referring to.)