paper

What did Dijkstra do 50 years ago?

Towards The Origins of Computational Complexity

One of my students at Utrecht University reflected during the spring of 2014 on the origins of computational complexity. She has given me permission to publish her beautiful essay here (anonymously).

Her chosen research topic is a difficult one to address. But, by presenting a pluralistic account in which she lets her historical actors tell the story (Cobham, Hartmanis, Rabin, Blum), she has succeeded in conveying technical information to an audience that need not be versed in complexity theory per se.

Turing — the Father of Computer Science

Towards a Historical Notion of "Turing — the Father of Computer Science"  is Edgar Daylight's Original Manuscript of an article submitted for consideration in the journal History and Philosophy of Logic, copyright protected by Taylor & Francis.

Officially, the article is still under peer review for the third and last time. In practice, it is already available via this pdf link.

McKeag's account of T.H.E.

Dijkstra's Rallying Cry for Generalization is pleased to offer to its readers Chapter III of the book Studies in Operating Systems by R. M. McKeag and R. Wilson, edited by D H. R. Huxtable and published in 1976 by Academic Press:

T.H.E. Multiprogramming System (18.6 MiB PDF)
by R. M. McKeag

For personal use only. Republished here with the kind permission of McKeag and Fujitsu Services Ltd.

Dijkstra and Van Wijngaarden

Here's a comment from another reviewer for my paper on `Dijkstra's Rallying Cry...':

Dijkstra the Linguist?

Is it correct to say that Dijkstra reasoned linguistically during the late 1950s and early 1960s? A reviewer of the research paper `Dijkstra's Rallying Cry ...' expressed his reservations about this matter.

In the reviewer's own words:

Computer efficiency

Here is what a reviewer had to say about the research paper `Dijkstra’s Rallying Cry ...':

The paper is, in essence, about an argument of generality versus computer efficiency. The argument was eventually settled in favour of the former due to the enormous advances in electronic technology. Today, computer efficiency is not an issue any more.

Is this correct? The last sentence seems to contradict Martin Reiser’s “law” which states that

 
Subscribe to RSS - paper
© 2011–today by the respective authors. All rights reserved.