3 ms·
> not sure if CoffeeScript is Turing-complete Wait, why wouldn't it be?
by apl 15y ago
> not sure if CoffeeScript is Turing-complete
Wait, why wouldn't it be?
- rhizome 15y agoHeck if I know, I'm not CS trained. Point being, CoffeeScript and other compilers would get a big boost if someone came out with a way to convert existing JS codebases into these new, more readable, more maintainable (as the story goes) representations.
- alecperkins 15y agojs2cs - https://github.com/mindynamics/js2cs https://github.com/mindynamics/js2cs Though I've found doing the conversion manually is a better way to learn CoffeeScript. Plus, it is a point for optimization and refactoring since CoffeeScript allows for doing certain things more easily or in better ways. The automated conversion only does so much.
- Wilfred 15y agoIt is, though that's not very surprising. Here's a quick proof: S-K combinators[1] are a Turing-complete subset of lambda calculus. Here's an implementation of them: k = (x) -> (y) -> x s = (x) -> (y) -> (z) -> x(z)(y(z)) 1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKI_combinator_calculus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKI_combinator_calculus