can we ask ................. Pushdown automaton is more powerfull than finite automaton
can we ask ................. Pushdown automaton is more powerfull than finite automaton
We could ask... but the answer is always forty-two
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
How many pushdown's must a man walk down? That's the question isn't it? What are they? Are they like press ups?
It says it doesn't know the question. Only the answer... I'm baffled.
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
I know, but the mice came up with some good ideas ....
Anyways, is this what you're on about? I've read it, but am really confused!
I gave it a look too before. It seems to indicate the answer is yes.
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
I would say it's more powerful than a simple finite state machine simply because more information is there (plus all the information a finite automaton would have since it's just another type), but that's not to say it's more useful. Often a stack isn't needed.
