Discussion of article "Automata-Based Programming as a New Approach to Creating Automated Trading Systems" - page 2

[Vladimir Gomonov]

sergeev:

a strange article that is at least 10 years behind programming.

You're very kind. I estimate 50 years.

The theory of finite automata began to be developed in Turing's time and by the beginning of the 60s it was already practically finished and cast in bronze.

(see, for example, Automata Theory)

[Andrey F. Zelinsky]

MetaDriver:

The theory of finite automata began to be developed in Turing's time and by the beginning of the 60's was already practically finished and cast in bronze.

(see, for example, Automata Theory)

What does the theory of finite automata have to do with it? We read at the beginning of the article:

In Russia the author Shalyto A.A. (teacher, professor, doctor of technical sciences, head of the department "Programming Technologies" of SPbSU ITMO, ) in 1991 developed a way of programming, called by him "automata programming".

Reference to SWITCH-technology that Shalyto proposed https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switch-%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%B8%D1%8F.

Shalyto himself http://is.ifmo.ru/persons/shalyto/

[Dmitry Fedoseev]

What is this article about? About what is a switch operator? o_O

[Vladimir Gomonov]

abolk:

What does finite automata theory have to do with it? We read at the beginning of the article:

In Russia the author Shalyto A.A. (teacher, professor, doctor of technical sciences, head of the department of "Programming Technologies" of SPbSU ITMO, ) in 1991 developed a programming method called by him "automata programming".

Intentional or unintentional detachment of the description of any private craft from the general theoretical context is in fact a gross distortion of the meaning of the message and borders on falsehood. "Culturally designed" conclusion: The author, either by misunderstanding or out of material interest, greatly exaggerates the novelty and practical value of this particular development of the mentioned A.A. Shalyto.

:)

[Dmitry Fedoseev]

By the way, using switch, it is much easier to miss some state than branching by 2 using if. With the use of if you can immediately see for which state there is no action.

In the wiki it is a strong idea to generate an automaton by genetic algorithm:).

ps. I wonder if it is possible to do a PhD on "using if in programming"?

[Andrey F. Zelinsky]

Integer:

ps. I wonder if it is possible to do a PhD on "use of if in programming"?

To do this, you should first do a PhD on "use of operator brackets in programming"

[Stanislav Korotky]

Integer:

By the way, using switch, it is much easier to miss some state than branching by 2 using if. With the use of if, you can see at a glance which state has no action.

IMHO, a bunch of ifs is no better than a large switch. The optimal way to describe an automaton in terms of compactness and strictness of self-checking is, for example, through LR(1) grammar.

[Andrey F. Zelinsky]

In this context - switch is a state construct.

To use a switch construct here, you must first define the state for the switch construct with a complex if-construction.

[Ivan Kornilov]

Yes, you're reminded of the Shalyto article on Lookmore - http://lurkmore.to/_/66330#mws_ksZYqtl.

[Rorschach]

"3. I was curious and wanted to hear the white noise of real ticks, and was able to do so using WaveLab 6.0 software."

Hee. It turns out I am not the only nutter like this))))) Here's what I got. I did it through Adobe Audience.

How did you normalise the price?