Revision as of 01:59, 18 August 2012 edit Bhny (talk \| contribs) 14,433 edits →Removal of first sentence ← Previous edit		Revision as of 15:00, 18 August 2012 edit undo Wvbailey (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers 6,019 edits →Removal of first sentence: no Next edit →
Line 237: :Algorithm already has a generally agreed definition here- [[algorithm]] [[User:Bhny\|Bhny]] ([[User talk:Bhny\|talk]]) 01:42, 18 August 2012 (UTC) : "There is no generally-accepted definition of <subject>" is a really bad way to begin an article. There actually is a generally-accepted definition of algorithm, the problem is with a formal characterization of algorithm. Agreed? [[User:Bhny\|Bhny]] ([[User talk:Bhny\|talk]]) 01:58, 18 August 2012 (UTC) No, not agreed. I provided two citations that also disagree. Gurevich actually asserts that an algorithm is a Turing machine, a mechanism, and not just a sequence of symbols that is interpretable by a target mechanism. Bill[[User:Wvbailey\|Wvbailey]] ([[User talk:Wvbailey\|talk]]) 15:00, 18 August 2012 (UTC) == cItation #1 ==

Talk:Algorithm characterizations: Difference between revisions