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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930
X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public
X-Google-Thread: 11232c,59ec73856b699922
X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,59ec73856b699922
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-02 21:35:04 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!msunews!not-for-mail
From: "Chad R. Meiners" <crmeiners@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.lang.ada,misc.misc
Subject: Re: Using Ada for device drivers? (Was: the Ada mandate,
 and why it collapsed and died)
Date: Sat, 3 May 2003 00:24:10 -0400
Organization: Michigan State University
Message-ID: <b8vgn6$rno$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>
References: <9fa75d42.0304230424.10612b1a@posting.google.com>
 <9fa75d42.0304240950.45114a39@posting.google.com>
 <4a885870.0304291909.300765f@posting.google.com>
 <416273D61ACF7FEF.82C1D1AC17296926.FF0BFD4934A03813@lp.airnews.net>
 <4a885870.0304300431.49a61bfa@posting.google.com>
 <b8p0of$pjs$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>
 <4a885870.0304301937.b27ec47@posting.google.com>
 <b8r3hu$m8$1@slb4.atl.mindspring.net>
 <4a885870.0305012015.7bea7358@posting.google.com>
 <b8u0u5$2ere$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>
 <4a885870.0305021913.31ffb745@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: arctic.cse.msu.edu
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:63080 comp.object:62622
 comp.lang.ada:36901 misc.misc:13922
Date: 2003-05-03T00:24:10-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Will" <wv9557@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4a885870.0305021913.31ffb745@posting.google.com...
> I hate to say it but your definition of algorithm is wrong. Algorithm
> is an established and provable way to  solve a problem.

An algorithm is any sequence of well defined instructions that halt.
Whether or not an algorithm solves a problem is irrelevant.

> There is no documented way, that I know of, to win a chess game.
> Therefore there is not a chess algorithm.

There are a finite number of states in which a chessboard can be configured.
Thus, the existence of a winning strategy can be determined in a finite
amount of time.  Unfortunately the cost in time is rather large, but it is
finite; thus, an optimal chess algorithm exists.