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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,93a8020cc980d113
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!news.binc.net!kilgallen
From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What is wrong with Ada?
Date: 23 Apr 2007 16:16:31 -0500
Organization: Berbee Information Networks Corporation
Message-ID: <hvVPmLqG5zKr@eisner.encompasserve.org>
References: <1176150704.130880.248080@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>
 <zyBSh.44138$oV.14776@attbi_s21> <461B52A6.20102@obry.net>
 <awirc4gv13.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <461BA892.3090002@obry.net>
 <yeabxgnsrj.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <82dgve.spf.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
 <1176226291.589741.257600@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
 <4eaive.6p9.ln@hunter.axlog.fr> <sa4ps6apjb7.fsf@margay.local>
 <wccwt0ho2fc.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <1rbtw92apxpl1.1ednvo8v6oiq8$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <aslkgxyvpj.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> Organization: LJK Software
NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org
X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1177362968 21143 192.135.80.34 (23 Apr 2007
 21:16:08 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 21:16:08 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15240
Date: 2007-04-23T16:16:31-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <uk5w2kepu.fsf@STRIPCAPStelus.net>, Ray Blaak <rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net> writes:
> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:

>> Any actually existing program can be expressed with single natural number. 

> While technically true, that characterization is not really useful in terms of
> actually using such numbers, and does not really say anything at all about how
> trivial such numbers/programs are.
> 
> In fact, the art of finding such numbers that do useful work for humans is
> hard. People who know how to do that are called programmers.

The traditional encounter is for construction of a Fortran compiler.
I propose to write the top element, and you write the lower one:

+-----------+
| Increment |<-----|
|  Memory   |      |
+-----------+      |
      |            |
      |            |
     / \           |
    /   \          |
   / Is  \         |
  / this  \        |
 /a Fortran\_______|
 \Compiler?/  No
  \       /
   \     /
    \   /
     \ /
      | Yes
      |
      |
    Done