17 Sep
2015
17 Sep
'15
12:30 a.m.
Crispin states this in the paper and says:-
The proof that actual modification of instructions is required for all
possible problems is contained in C.C. Elgot and A. Robinson,
''Random-Access
Stored-Program Machines, An Approach to Programming Languages,'' J. ACM,
vol. 11, no. 4, 1964, p. 397
I didn't follow up the reference I guess I should.....
... and those of you who are interested in reading about early computing may
enjoy this article about
"CSIR Mark 1/CSIRAC : Australia's First Computer"
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/CCS/res/res67.htm#d
I found it interesting...
Dave Wade
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of ben
Sent: 17 September 2015 04:37
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Self modifying code, lambda calculus - Re: ENIAC programming
On 9/16/2015 9:25 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
> On 2015-09-16 6:18 PM, Dave G4UGM wrote:
>>
>> ...
>> It is notable that in order to solve all problems, a computer must
>> permit self modifying code.
>
>
> Is that true? AFAIK Lambda calculus can describe any computable
> function (as can a Turing machine), and it has no concept of "self
modifying
code".
I never studied any of that, but you do have to LOAD and RUN the program
ToSolveAnythingBut42
some how so I guess that would count AS Self Modifying Code.
> --Toby