In this SO Question there is a comment by starblue that
A computer without loops is a calculator
Is this true?
Is that the only difference?
Is there a set of criteria to differentiate or has the line become very blurred?
-
10Don't take short, single-sentence definitions like this for absolute truths. They are ofen an example of ha-ha-only-serious and not meant to be absolutely, unquestionably true in all cases.– Joachim SauerCommented Dec 20, 2012 at 12:54
-
I only have to say this. Haskell do not have any loop constructs. So if the above is true, Haskell is only good for creating calculators.– Manoj RCommented Dec 20, 2012 at 13:28
-
1@ManojR: Recursion is a form of looping construct.– John BartholomewCommented Dec 20, 2012 at 14:33
-
1Calculators compute things, thus they're computers in my view. Have a look here for a little history of the word computer, it meant non-electronic for longer than it has meant electronic. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_computer– Jimmy HoffaCommented Dec 20, 2012 at 15:56
-
3All calculators are computers. Not all computers are calculators.– CurtisHxCommented Dec 20, 2012 at 16:57
Add a comment
|
3 Answers
a computer is generally turing complete
whereas the calculator is either a Pushdown Automaton (when it has brackets and priority of operations) or a Finite State Automat when it doesn't (it excecutes the next operation on the last result)
answered Dec 20, 2012 at 12:47
-
Of course, strictly speaking, any real world computer is a finite state automaton. Commented Dec 20, 2012 at 13:14
-
In layman's terms, you could say that a computer is a general purpose device that can do anything. A calculator can only perform a specific set of tasks.– Dan LingCommented Dec 20, 2012 at 13:45
-
No, 90-99% of programming calculators were turing complete, too. At least what was sold by this name.– GangnusCommented Dec 20, 2012 at 14:55
-
A universal positive unconditional sentence cannot be true. (This one, for example, is universal, but negative). Here Joachim Sauer is correct.
"A computer without loops is a calculator" is a definition. It cannot be true or false at all. You can accept it or not.
But any definition can be widely or universally accepted or not to be. Or maybe it was sometimes accepted. Here you should choose yourself, what do you want.
As for history, in the middle of the XX century in fantastic literature all computers were called calculators. Later, in 70/80-ties, programmable calculators had hundreds of command places, arrays, cycles, conditional branches, gotos and everything. As I remember, much more programs were made for them than for "large" computers.
Now programmable calculators are a minor business, but they do exist and there are new models of them. Look here.
So, the answers are: no; no(difference is in size mostly); yes, it is blurred. Of course, as far as you take wiki as widely accepted opinion
-
"A universal positive sentence cannot be true" 1 always equals 1 Commented Dec 20, 2012 at 14:54
-
Sorry, I can't find the correct English word. We are talking about real life, not mathematics. Any mathematician sentence is conditional, even if it doesn't seem so. Conditional sentences yes, can be universal positive and true. Answer is edited.– GangnusCommented Dec 20, 2012 at 14:59
It's not true if you're talking about a standard calculator. I would consider conditionals to be very important here as well.
