Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:whoosh! (Score 1) 309

by narcc (#47568635) Attached to: Programming Languages You'll Need Next Year (and Beyond)

That definition is decades old.

So defined by whom? On what basis? Can you direct me to the relevant literature? (Don't look too hard, you won't find anything. Since we're playing CS101, you should pay particularly close attention to formal language theory, which you'll find quite illuminating.)

HTML5+CSS3 is known to be Turing complete, yet no one would call HTML5+CSS3 a "programming language". There are other languages which are broadly recognized as "programming languages" which are not Turing complete. (CS101 again: TM's provide just one of many models of computation. Another, which is not Turing complete, would be FSM's. There are many others.)

See, this thread is all about informal definitions. What is considered a programming language or not in a practical sense. The problem, of course, is that everyone here seems to have forgotten that! If you want to be pedantic, a programming language can be Turing complete, or not. They're just ways in which instructions are provided to a computer.

Comment: Re:whoosh! (Score 1) 309

by narcc (#47567037) Attached to: Programming Languages You'll Need Next Year (and Beyond)

It's not about mere basic arithmetic, it's about whether or not symbolic computation is possible. The litmus test is whether or not you can write a simulation of a universal Turing Machine within the computer language.

Oh, in that case, HTML5 +CSS3 qualifies. The more you know.

Despite that fact, no one in their right mind would describe the combination that way. I'd find better criteria, if I were you.

Comment: Re:wrong bro (Score 1) 309

by narcc (#47562175) Attached to: Programming Languages You'll Need Next Year (and Beyond)

we can get pedantic about the difference between "coding" and "programming" languages

No, you can't. There is no formal distinction. There isn't even a commonly understood / agreed upon informal distinction!

Pretending that such a distinction exists is just another silly way for the otherwise unskilled to make themselves feel superior to their peers.

Comment: Re:Repeat after me... (Score 1) 309

by narcc (#47562141) Attached to: Programming Languages You'll Need Next Year (and Beyond)

Yes, you're right.

The fact that you think not knowing CSS will make a programmer limited showcases that your programming experience is limited to front-end development.

It's clear that he thinks that anyone who thinks that "not knowing CSS will make a programmer limited" somehow indicates that that person's "programming experience is limited to front-end development"

It's far more irrational than I originally thought!

One is (obviously) not an indicator of the other. You'd think will all the self-proclaimed "rationalists" on Slashdot that this sort of nonsense wouldn't be so prevalent.

Comment: Re:Dear Slashdot (Score 4, Informative) 170

See, old stuff that *they* like is important. Working on that stuff is a great idea.

Working on old stuff that they don't care about is clearly a waste of time.

Anyhow, here's a start for you: GCC PRC-Tools Which is likely what you want. Ron's Obsolete Palm OS Computing Information Page has a working link to HotPaw, which is better than nothing.

You'll also want to take advantage of the Wayback Machine to see what's behind all the dead links you're surely running in to.

Nobody's gonna believe that computers are intelligent until they start coming in late and lying about it.

Working...