Yes, the author doesn't know what he's talking about.
But people talking about Turing completeness in a real programming language (usually in the form of "x is Turing complete, therefore you couldn't ask for more") almost always haven't got a clue.
But people talking about Turing completeness in a real programming language (usually in the form of "x is Turing complete, therefore you couldn't ask for more") almost always haven't got a clue.
There is a fun quote about that...
"There are those who tell us that any choice from among theoretically-equivalent alternatives is merely a question of taste. These are the people who bring up the Strong Church-Turing Thesis in discussions of programming languages meant for use by humans. They are malicious idiots. The only punishment which could stand a chance at reforming these miscreants into decent people would be a year or two at hard labor. And not just any kind of hard labor: specifically, carrying out long division using Roman numerals. A merciful tyrant would give these wretches the option of a firing squad. Those among these criminals against mathematics who prove unrepentant in their final hours would be asked to prove the Turing-equivalence of a spoon to a shovel as they dig their graves."
-- Stanislav Datskovskiy
As such, I think it represents one of the most enlightening esoteric languages out there together with Brainfuck.
"Garbage collection is simulating a computer with an infinite amount of memory". https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20100809-00/?p=...
We both agree, I'm just using this as a pretext to share this intriguing piece of knowledge. I find the concept much more intuitive than "getting back unused memory".
Especially when you look at the 90% memory usage on your OS, it still make sense with the "infinite memory simulation" definition.