Re: A case for HTML as a programming language
From: Programmer Dude (Chris_at_Sonnack.com)
Date: 12/08/04
- Next message: Friedrich Dominicus: ".stab format on AMD64"
- Previous message: Programmer Dude: "Re: A case for HTML as a programming language"
- Maybe in reply to: Edward G. Nilges: "Re: A case for HTML as a programming language"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 10:42:42 -0600
Arthur J. O'Dwyer writes:
>>> the question of HTML as a language is one of those interesting ones
>>
>> Speak for yourself! I don't find it interesting in the least! (-:
>> One more time: HTML is a ***markup*** language. It is a "meta"
>> language for adding meta information to an information stream.
>
> I agree with you that HTML is a markup language, and that this thread
> has been dominated by people's confusion between FSMs and "real"
> Turing-complete languages. [snip]
>
> But I wouldn't be surprised if Turing-completeness had slipped into
> HTML somewhere along the way, the same way TC seems to slip into any
> sufficiently complex tool..
But I don't know if I'd call HTML a complex tool. And I would be
surprised to find out its TC (in the casual definition).
> So I find that question interesting. Not terribly /deep/, no---it's
> just a yes-or-no question ("Is HTML 4.0 Turing-complete?")---but
> I would like to know the answer sometime.
That is a different--and I agree slightly interesting--question.
- Next message: Friedrich Dominicus: ".stab format on AMD64"
- Previous message: Programmer Dude: "Re: A case for HTML as a programming language"
- Maybe in reply to: Edward G. Nilges: "Re: A case for HTML as a programming language"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
