Saying "latently-typed language" is making a category mistake

[Chris Uppal]

Pascal Costanza wrote:

> Sorry, obviously I was far from being clear. ACL2 is not
> Turing-complete. All iterations must be expressed in terms of
> well-founded recursion.

How expressive does that end up being for real problems ?   I mean obviously in
some sense it's crippling, but how much of a restiction would that be for
non-accademic programming.  Could I write an accountancy package in it, or an
adventure games, or a webserver, with not too much more difficulty than in a
similar language without that one aspect to its type system ?

Hmm, come to think of it those all hae endless loops at the outer level, with
the body of the loop being an event handler, so maybe only the handler should
be required to guaranteed to terminate.

    -- chris