(Replying to PARENT post)
> Programming paradigm fanboys get into heated arguments about which model is the "best" one
My original comment certainly reads that way, but my intent was really to point out that it doesn't make sense to privilege the Turing machine model in the study of computation. I wrote more about why in this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27334163
๐คantonvs๐4y๐ผ0๐จ๏ธ0
(Replying to PARENT post)
Well, computing science studies programming paradigms; so defining them and analyzing what makes them suitable for what purposes is pretty much within its scope.
As I said above, it may very well be that the best usage for Turing machines is using them in mathematical proofs; where the efficiency of the computation is not a concern.
๐คTuringTest๐4y๐ผ0๐จ๏ธ0
(Replying to PARENT post)
Sometimes that could mean using the lambda calculus, particularly in study of language theory and type systems. Other times that could mean some sort of black box model, such as when proving lower bounds for solving problems using specific operations (see e.g. the sorting lower bound). Yet other times, like when establishing the ground-zero of some new variety of computational hardness, I can't think of many more suitable models to cut up into pieces and embed into the substrate of some other problem than those based upon Turing machines.