# Turing Complete with flows!? **URL:** \ **Category:** Ideas & Suggestions\ **Created:** [May 31, 2021, 2:22pm UTC](https://community.homey.app/t/turing-complete-with-flows/47989 "2021-05-31T14:22:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Mikael\_Sandberg](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex025/user_avatar/community.homey.app/mikael_sandberg/32/33829_2.png) [@Mikael\_Sandberg](https://community.homey.app/u/Mikael_Sandberg)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2021, 6:58am UTC](https://community.homey.app/t/turing-complete-with-flows/47989/21 "2021-06-01T06:58:27Z")
So this argument is then totally rhetorical? Do I understand correctly, that you are pro this suggestion but against the TC reference? ---
**Author:** ![robertklep](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex025/user_avatar/community.homey.app/robertklep/32/160628_2.png) [@robertklep](https://community.homey.app/u/robertklep)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2021, 6:59am UTC](https://community.homey.app/t/turing-complete-with-flows/47989/22 "2021-06-01T06:59:06Z")
No, you don’t understand correctly. ---
**Author:** ![Mikael\_Sandberg](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex025/user_avatar/community.homey.app/mikael_sandberg/32/33829_2.png) [@Mikael\_Sandberg](https://community.homey.app/u/Mikael_Sandberg)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2021, 6:59am UTC](https://community.homey.app/t/turing-complete-with-flows/47989/23 "2021-06-01T06:59:27Z")
Please enlighten me then? ---
**Author:** ![robertklep](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex025/user_avatar/community.homey.app/robertklep/32/160628_2.png) [@robertklep](https://community.homey.app/u/robertklep)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2021, 6:59am UTC](https://community.homey.app/t/turing-complete-with-flows/47989/24 "2021-06-01T06:59:48Z")
> [@robertklep](#): > > I’m against the proposition that adding that extension would suddenly make Homey’s flows TC “I’m against the proposition that adding that extension would suddenly make Homey’s flows TC”. Either it’s already TC, or it’s not. Adding this extension won’t change it. ---
**Author:** ![Arie\_J\_Godschalk](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex025/user_avatar/community.homey.app/arie_j_godschalk/32/63027_2.png) [@Arie\_J\_Godschalk](https://community.homey.app/u/Arie_J_Godschalk)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2021, 7:00am UTC](https://community.homey.app/t/turing-complete-with-flows/47989/25 "2021-06-01T07:00:28Z")
I feel like my messages are not being read? (The questionmarks are the number1 flowvariable) Here is a Flow (method) with 2 aruments: 1 text and 1 number. When the flow is started, it will executed itself 11 times; 5 times with the text **Text1-5** , 5 times with the text **Text5-10** and then reset with text **Restart**. This is what you are talking about right? ---
**Author:** ![Edwin\_D](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex025/user_avatar/community.homey.app/edwin_d/32/136417_2.png) [@Edwin\_D](https://community.homey.app/u/Edwin_D)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2021, 7:41am UTC](https://community.homey.app/t/turing-complete-with-flows/47989/26 "2021-06-01T07:41:34Z")
Well, you asked to add this for the sake of turing completeness, which is a bad argument, and because if that not likely to be implemented. That is why I asked for real life examples (a better reason). For now fixing Group app bugs seems like an easier route to your use case. Also the group app is more versatile and easier to understand by the masses in my opinion. ---
**Author:** ![matrover](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex025/user_avatar/community.homey.app/matrover/32/12112_2.png) [@matrover](https://community.homey.app/u/matrover)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2021, 10:44am UTC](https://community.homey.app/t/turing-complete-with-flows/47989/27 "2021-06-06T10:44:29Z")
+1 for this feature. Hoop is great but in my opinion there is some space between homey flows and hoop. And they can exist next to eachother [Previous page](https://community.homey.app/t/turing-complete-with-flows/47989.md?page=1)