**Wentz:** I was having a mathy discussion in ##programming

**Gangloff:** And it was, well, silly

**Geho:** The “Number” type in JavaScript is a 64 bit floating point number as defined in an IEEE spec.

**Ishikawa:** Because a spec is a spec, its defined by humans to be a certain thing

**Silberman:** And humans have defined anything to the power of 0 as 1, whether its the spec or infinity or whichever

**Alrais:** But, i ask, is javascript a turing complete language?

**Penner:** Turing complete isn’t hard.

**Demetree:** The lambda calculus is turing complete.

**Seargent:** If you can implement the lambda calculus, you are turing complete.

**Velez:** You can implement the lambda calculus with just two Stacks.

**Friddle:** A JS array implements everything a Stack needs.

**Brian:** You can have multiple JS arrays at the same time.

**Isla:** Ergo, JS is turing complete.

**Carotenuto:** So, turing basically proves that a function hi,x where it is 1 if program ix halts, and 0 otherwise does not exist

**Mellencamp:** In terms of the halting problem, right?

**Eidemiller:** Er, he’s proving that h does not exist

**Hengen:** At least, according to the wikipedia explanation of his proof

**Cadotte:** Which is, well, wikipedia

**Moake:** What about ix = powerx,0

**Kocian:** How can you prove a general program converges onto a value if you cannot prove that it converges.

**Senechal:** What do you mean by not being able to prove that it halts/converges?

**Broder:** Have you solved the halting problem? ðŸ˜›

**Trevithick:** Maybe i’m just insane

**Scollard:** What’s next? P != NP?

**Glanden:** Well i know what you mean, i guess the question is better phrased in what context

**Sager:** The halting problem states that it is impossible to know whether an arbitrary program halts converges or executes forever diverges.

**Trobridge:** Well it’d require a program that could read a program

**Dustman:** You’re asking now if it’s possible to know if that same arbitrary value halts converges onto a specific value.

**Hirshberg:** Same arbitrary function **

**Firkey:** Same arbitrary program **

**Kypuros:** Since we cannot even know if it’ll halt, how can we know it will halt on a specific value?

**Golojuch:** Well why can’t we know if it’ll halt? the power function by definition halts, it can be defined recursively

**Demny:** What it halts on is a bit subjective

**Troise:** Oh wait, you’re asking a different question.

**Rojos:** I’m focusing on h being the power function

**Inacio:** I was reading ix = powerx, 0 differently. ðŸ˜›

**Flenner:** Yes, it’s possible to know about certain specific functions.

**Enget:** We always know that powerx, 0 halts given x : floating point number

**Muro:** Well, if a program was designed around that

**Goudeau:** If we know the structure of a program, we can generally know if it will halt or not.

**Ramaswamy:** I guess that’s like saying if there’s a program designed around a halting function, which still definitely halts

**Straley:** But it gets sorta recursive. a program that can read a program

**Stotesberry:** A program that can read a program that can read a program

**Strycker:** S/program/function/ ?

**Pablo:** Welcome to metaprogramming and tool authorship.

**Mish:** But that’s life right? it goes in a circle until an exception is defined

**Romane:** I’ve always enjoyed tool making and system design

**Fack:** Does system design fall under metaprogramming?

**Barge:** Programming about programming, yeah

**Difilippo:** But what is a design but a formula or a “program” for a program