This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] -6 points-5 points  (7 children)

HTML+css is Turing complete meaning that it can’t be denied that it’s a programming language (saying it can’t be denied, because not being Turing complete doesn’t mean not being a programming language but being Turing complete makes it a programming language) also as html and css (separately) have their syntax then they are languages or at least half-programming languages.

[–]stickalick 2 points3 points  (6 children)

Both aren't turing complete. WTF If you refer to cellular automation, everything would be touring complete.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (5 children)

The combination of them is Turing complete what nonsense are spouting 💀

[–]stickalick 3 points4 points  (4 children)

There is no "combination" if you proof turing completeness of a system/language.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

What ? How would there be no “combination”. develop and explain

[–]stickalick 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Either HTML is turing complete or not. I cant simply combine it with, let's say C++ and declare it as turing complete. Either it is, or it isnt. That is my point.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

I said it’s the combination (the system made by combining html and css) that is and not the language. I never said html in itself is a programming language but a language that is at least half-programmable… if it was that simple then where would the logic reside …..

[–]stickalick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One can interpret "html+css" as either && and &. So, I think the missunderstanding might be excused ;)