From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c42dbf68f5320193 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-07 10:31:12 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!paloalto-snh1.gtei.net!paloalto-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!enews.sgi.com!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!not-for-mail From: "Chad R. Meiners" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Generation of permutations Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 13:25:17 -0400 Organization: Michigan State University Message-ID: References: <3CD71F4D.C29A60FC@san.rr.com> <5ee5b646.0205070239.77c6bac2@posting.google.com> Reply-To: "Chad R. Meiners" NNTP-Posting-Host: arctic.cse.msu.edu X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:23659 Date: 2002-05-07T13:25:17-04:00 List-Id: "Robert Dewar" wrote in message news:5ee5b646.0205070239.77c6bac2@posting.google.com... > tmoran@acm.org wrote in message news:... > The phrase "recursively undecidable" should be a tip off that we are > in that realm :-) Actually I am interested where you picked up the phrase "recursively undecidable". A better phrase would be "not recursive" since we are referring to recursive languages. Perhaps it is simply a hybridization of "Turing-decidable" and "recursive" since it would be harmless enough to merge two equivalent phrases.