Programs=data=first-class citizens in a computational world

Abstract

From a programming perspective, Alan Turing's epochal 1936 paper on computable functions introduced several new concepts, including what is today known as self-interpreters and programs as data , and invented a great many now-common programming techniques. We begin by reviewing Turing's contribution from a programming perspective; and then systematize and mention some of the many ways that later developments in models of computation (MOCs) have interacted with computability theory and programming language research. Next, we describe the ‘blob’ MOC: a recent stored-program computational model without pointers . In the blob model, programs are truly first-class citizens , capable of being automatically compiled, or interpreted, or executed directly. Further, the blob model appears closer to being physically realizable than earlier computation models. In part, this is due to strong finiteness owing to early binding in the program; and a strong adjacency property : the active instruction is always adjacent to the piece of data on which it operates. The model is Turing complete in a strong sense: a universal interpretation algorithm exists that is able to run any program in a natural way and without arcane data encodings. Next, some of the best known among the numerous existing MOCs are described, and we develop a list of traits an ‘ideal’ MOC should possess from our perspective. We make no attempt to consider all models put forth since Turing's 1936 paper, and the selection of models covered concerns only models with discrete, atomic computation steps. The next step is to classify the selected models by qualitative rather than quantitative features. Finally, we describe how the blob model differs from an ‘ideal’ MOC, and identify some natural next steps to achieve such a model.

The language faculty that wasn't: a usage-based account of natural language recursion

“…The latter is limited by memory limitations, attention span, lack of concentration, and other processing constraints, whereas the former is construed to be essentially infinite in virtue of the recursive nature of grammar. There are a number of methodological and theoretical issues with the competence/performance distinction (e.g., Reich, 1969 ; Pylyshyn, 1973 ; Christiansen, 1992 ; Petersson, 2005 ; see also Christiansen and Chater, Forthcoming 2016 ). Here, however, we focus on a substantial challenge to the standard solution, deriving from the considerable variation across languages and individuals in the use of recursive structures—differences that cannot readily be ascribed to performance factors.…”

The foundations of computation, physics and mentality: the Turing legacy

“…Quoting Feferman's reference to the oracle Turing machine as a 'new idea that was to change the face of the general theory of computation', Soare traces the historical and contemporary significance of the oracle machine over a range of fields. -The article by Jones & Simonsen [2] discusses the ramifications of the programs as data concept and considers general desirable features of models of computation. It discusses a recently proposed model, motivated by biology, the 'blob' model, and to what extent it meets these ideal features and how the remaining desiderata could be addressed.…”