From: terje.mathisen@nospicedham.tmsw.no   
      
   olcott wrote:   
   > On 9/5/2020 11:50 PM, Frank Kotler wrote:   
   >> On 09/05/2020 03:06 PM, Terje Mathisen wrote:   
   >>> Please, no more!   
   >>>   
   >>> Turing-complete "C" has absolutely _nothing_ to do with   
   >>> comp.lang.asm.x86, and does not belong here. :-(   
   >>   
   >> I fear I made an error on approving this in the first place. I saw a   
   >> reference to "x86" and thought "well maybe..." But we are not about C   
   >> here... Hopefully it will die put quietly...   
   >>   
   >> Best,   
   >> Frank   
   >> [moderator]   
   >>   
   >>   
   >   
   > No one here seems to care about how x86/x64 computations are Turing   
   > equivalent. I created an Universal Turing Machine (UTM) equivalent that   
   > has the x86 language as its description language.   
   >   
   Turing-complete computers are the rule rather than the exception. I.e.   
   _all_ existing microprocessors, from the original 4004 and up are TC.   
      
   Going down to more esoteric "computers", both Minecraft and the Game of   
   Life have been shown to be TC. :-)   
      
   Please don't bring back the requirement for infinite storage since that   
   simply reduces the number of TC architectures to zero.   
      
   Terje   
      
   --   
   -    
   "almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)