Timeline for Procedure-based (as opposed to definition-based) concepts
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 2021 at 6:50 | answer | added | მამუკა ჯიბლაძე | timeline score: 1 | |
| Aug 30, 2021 at 14:08 | history | edited | Stefan Kohl♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited tags; removed outdated last sentence.
|
| Apr 18, 2014 at 21:09 | answer | added | Gottfried Helms | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 4, 2013 at 11:15 | vote | accept | James Propp | ||
| Jul 3, 2013 at 7:30 | answer | added | David Corfield | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 2, 2013 at 23:19 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by Kim Morrison | ||
| Jul 2, 2013 at 19:12 | comment | added | Włodzimierz Holsztyński | Unfounded methods which give results are great (today too) but with the understanding that it is a temporary imperfect state of affairs. Simple tautology. | |
| Jul 2, 2013 at 18:38 | comment | added | ex0du5 | Extensional semantics in computer science are regularly investigated. These are typically fixed point theories and are typical of many denotational programmes. In these semantics, the topics being investigated are things like (partial) correctness. Intensional semantics programmes, on the other hand, look at program definition and can be used to reason about computational complexity and related features of the procedures. I think that is likely the best formal framework in which to view your question. | |
| Jul 2, 2013 at 17:27 | answer | added | Brent Meeker | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 2, 2013 at 17:16 | answer | added | user9072 | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jul 2, 2013 at 16:04 | answer | added | The User | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 2, 2013 at 15:38 | history | asked | James Propp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |