Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Don't ask to ask, just ask
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: Perl Cannot Be Parsed: A Formal Proof

by Jeffrey Kegler (Hermit)
on Aug 15, 2009 at 01:53 UTC ( #788801=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Perl Cannot Be Parsed: A Formal Proof
in thread Perl Cannot Be Parsed: A Formal Proof

In a series of three articles in The Perl Review, now available online, I laid this proof out much more carefully, in three different versions. The most bullet-proof version derives the result directly from Rice's Theorem.

You are right that the proof would not go through if the only way of establishing a prototype for a Perl function was via a function definition. As I said in Perl Review (4.3, p. 28):

I must show that I can use Turing-complete Perl code to determine the prototype of the dunno subroutine at compile time. A function definition won’t work.

Summarizing from that article, there are at least two ways that the prototype of a subroutine can be established using Turing-complete Perl code. One is with symbol table manipulation, for example:

BEGIN { *dunno = sub () { 3 } }
A second way is to put the function definition into a string which is eval'd in a BEGIN block. I believe clever monks will be able to think of others.


Comment on Re^2: Perl Cannot Be Parsed: A Formal Proof
Download Code

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://788801]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others romping around the Monastery: (9)
As of 2015-07-04 11:35 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    The top three priorities of my open tasks are (in descending order of likelihood to be worked on) ...









    Results (59 votes), past polls