Talk:Computational class

If we've agreed to change from "isomorphism" to "reduction", there are now a lot of broken links to Computational class#Isomorphism. Is there any trick that can be used to fix them automatically? If not, I guess we start on the tedious process of changing them by hand. —Maharba 04:39, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

They should all work now. BTW, here's a list of them. —ehird 04:49, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah, of course. Obvious solution (why didn't I think of it?), and it fixes the immediate problem of the links being broken. What it doesn't fix is the links still using the old term, and I doubt there is an easy fix for that without a wiki bot. —Maharba 17:38, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Well I used ehird's search to do it by hand, anyhow. --Ørjan 02:56, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

And I got the ones you missed. —Maharba 04:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Is it really a partially ordered set? As an extreme example, how would the "programming language" mentioned below that only does the Ackermann function compare to another "programming language" that only does the factorial function? --(this comment by Lovecraftianmadness at 05:40, 19 February 2019‎ UTC; please sign your comments with ~~~~)

It's a partial preorder. Some languages are equivalent in power, some are incomparable. --ais523 08:11, 19 February 2019 (UTC)