Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

"Python 3 Is Not Turing Complete"

... Not only is this blatantly false, but the author acknowledges it as such and seems to think that it is still OK to write this sort of sentence. Backing a pure falsehood with anecdotal support from "actual Python project developers" does nothing to change its veracity. I can't respect anything else in this article after seeing this kind of sensationalism.

Perhaps the author doesn't understand Turing-completion (I'll give the author the benefit of the doubt), but even if so it's inexcusable to throw around this sort of technical language this casually.




Why the hell even bring that up. Not a very good tutorial in any way when the writer starts throwing around unrelated terms they don't grok.


It is also wrong, as PyPy interpreting Python 2.7 runs well in Python 3.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: