CSS3 proven to be Turing complete?

Re:CSS3 proven to be Turing complete? by lmkg on Tuesday December 15, 2015 @01:06PM (#10739301)

  > 1. Feeding infinite HTML is not the same as feeding 
  > tape. A million tape cells can keep a typical Turing 
  > machine running indefinitely. A million rows only keep 
  > this running for a million execution steps

There are read-only systems that are considered Turing Complete. They also work by concatenating new data (of potentially unbounded size) at each computation step. For example, a one-dimensional cellular automaton called Rule 110: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_110 . The fact that traditional Turing Machines reclaim storage is an implementation detail, not anything fundamental to Turing Completeness or computer science.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CSS3 proven to be Turing complete? by Dylan16807 on Tuesday December 15, 2015 @01:35PM (#10739497)

The distinction is that those systems have "create a new line via X" as a core part. That's not in CSS, that's external. That's the key thing keeping CSS from really being Turing Complete.

[ Parent | on HN ]