4 ms·

Since when did javascript become a "language"? Is it even Turing complete? I thought the word "script" meant "scripting language" which is NOT the same thing as

by Allocator2008 18y ago

Since when did javascript become a "language"? Is it even Turing complete? I thought the word "script" meant "scripting language" which is NOT the same thing as a full fledged language. If indeed javascript is the most popular "language" then God or Turing help us all.

qqq 18y ago
of course it's turing complete. the bar for that is very low.
- arockwell 18y ago
  Indeed, you only need one instruction to be turing complete. Subtract and branch if negative is turing complete: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_instruction_set_computer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_instruction_set_computer.
bootload 18y ago
"... Since when did javascript become a "language"? Is it even Turing complete? ..." You're right. What self respecting Startup would bother with such an obviously deficient language? It's just not up to the job. Just keep using your Turing complete C/C++, Java (or insert your own favourite Turing complete language) and everything will be alright.
mechanical_fish 18y ago
The perfect troll is the one where you're laughing so hard that you can't decide whether to ignore it, rebut it, downmod it, congratulate the author for writing something so perfectly ironic, or preserve it in a zoo so that future generations will know that such things once walked the earth.
lunaru 18y ago
LOL, I suppose Lisp is not Turing complete either. JavaScript happens to be one of the most elegant languages (sans the DOM and browser stuff that is tightly coupled with the language)
- jrockway 18y ago
  You use the word elegant like it's an objective statement, which it is not. I would disagree about it being elegant. It's a fine language, but it has no unifying concept. It's procedural, it has anonymous functions, it has simple OO built-in. This isn't really elegance because you can't go anywhere uncharted with this. The simplicity is there because there isn't much built-in. Code is not data. There is no module system. There is no generalized flow control. (I am not sure why language designers like manually implementing function calls / return, exceptions, loop/break/continue, etc. when continuations generalize all of this.) Anyway, JavaScript is useful, but it is a limited subset of nearly every other language. This may be good, but where features are missing, everyone has their own incompatible "fix" for that. That may or may not be elegance; I'm not sure.
parenthesis 18y ago
Javascript is good enough for your blog.

qqq 18y ago

of course it's turing complete. the bar for that is very low.

arockwell 18y ago
Indeed, you only need one instruction to be turing complete. Subtract and branch if negative is turing complete: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_instruction_set_computer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_instruction_set_computer.

bootload 18y ago

"... Since when did javascript become a "language"? Is it even Turing complete? ..." You're right. What self respecting Startup would bother with such an obviously deficient language? It's just not up to the job. Just keep using your Turing complete C/C++, Java (or insert your own favourite Turing complete language) and everything will be alright.

mechanical_fish 18y ago

The perfect troll is the one where you're laughing so hard that you can't decide whether to ignore it, rebut it, downmod it, congratulate the author for writing something so perfectly ironic, or preserve it in a zoo so that future generations will know that such things once walked the earth.

lunaru 18y ago

LOL, I suppose Lisp is not Turing complete either. JavaScript happens to be one of the most elegant languages (sans the DOM and browser stuff that is tightly coupled with the language)

jrockway 18y ago
You use the word elegant like it's an objective statement, which it is not. I would disagree about it being elegant. It's a fine language, but it has no unifying concept. It's procedural, it has anonymous functions, it has simple OO built-in. This isn't really elegance because you can't go anywhere uncharted with this. The simplicity is there because there isn't much built-in. Code is not data. There is no module system. There is no generalized flow control. (I am not sure why language designers like manually implementing function calls / return, exceptions, loop/break/continue, etc. when continuations generalize all of this.) Anyway, JavaScript is useful, but it is a limited subset of nearly every other language. This may be good, but where features are missing, everyone has their own incompatible "fix" for that. That may or may not be elegance; I'm not sure.

parenthesis 18y ago

Javascript is good enough for your blog.