You're just wrong when you say
> "dynamic programming" is an insanely general term
It is not. It is a specific technique to solve a number of problems having a certain structure. In the continuous case it leads to the Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman partial differential equation, in the discrete case it leads to the Bellman equation discussed above. The latter, in turn, gives rise to a specific and efficient algorithm.
Code morphing has nothing to do with dynamic programming (even though it might well be programming, and might well be dynamic).
Sometimes two words are put together in an expression that does not mean what the two words seem to imply. For example, a hot dog is not a dog that is hot. The theory of finite fields is not applicable to agriculture, even though the fields they cultivate are finite. And dynamic programming is not an insanely general term referring to all programming that has some dynamic element to it.
Like I said, agree to disagree on the basics of the language; which is usually a conversation closer. Feel free to talk to a wall from here on out, if you insist on getting the last word in.
It is not. It is a specific technique to solve a number of problems having a certain structure. In the continuous case it leads to the Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman partial differential equation, in the discrete case it leads to the Bellman equation discussed above. The latter, in turn, gives rise to a specific and efficient algorithm.
Code morphing has nothing to do with dynamic programming (even though it might well be programming, and might well be dynamic).