3 ms·
Heck, it means that theoretically you can't verify a CSS3 stylesheet for correctness because you don't know the stylesheet will ever finish rendering. In pract
by PeCaN 11y ago
Heck, it means that theoretically you can't verify a CSS3 stylesheet for correctness because you don't know the stylesheet will ever finish rendering.
In practice it's probably not a problem since you don't have infinite HTML, but it is theoretically slightly disturbing.
I'm an advocate of provably-correct, non-Turing-complete languages, which really should include CSS....
- Dylan16807 11y agoThis proof does not imply that. It cannot loop without you clicking all the boxes.
- PeCaN 11y agoA static analyzer doesn't know that you won't click all the boxes though.
- Dylan16807 11y agoIt still renders in O(n) time where n is the number of elements. You don't need Turing completeness to have trouble caused by user input. Imagine a million check boxes where the only rule is that they shrink by a pixel when checked. That should be about the same difficulty to analyze as the 110 rule checkboxes. Each input only affects the styling of 1-3 nodes.