In a discussion like this, it's best to assume that all parties understand the ramifications of Turing-completeness. The charitable interpretation is that aerovistae meant what I said - which is apparently the case.
I agree, however kzhahou made a claim that there could be a language that could do something another couldn't.
The discussion with aerovistae about computation came from their initial post:
>Unless of course you're trying to argue that the difference between python and javascript, for instance, is what each is capable of computing?
If we are talking about ideal machines, there is no argument to be made that there is a difference between what the two named languages are capable of computing.
In real life I am very happy to have very extended conversations explaining things to people who don't get it, but on the internet, it's really just not worth it. I'm sorry you have misunderstood so much of this thread.
Maybe it is you who misunderstands? I see your point, but my point is different. If you can give me the specific words of mine that you believe show a misunderstanding, I could try to clarify.
>Unless of course you're trying to argue that the difference between python and javascript, for instance, is what each is capable of computing?