Jelly needs ;<int>Ọ¤ to include a character with a code point of int, maximum. An escape means that your string syntax is more complex, and you have to escape the escape
of the four implemented string types, two are actually numbers :p
i don't think jelly was made for string challenges. it is perfectly capable of doing them it's just that you don't have built-ins tailored towards doing them, and most string manipulation is just the equivalent array manipulation
Dennis spent ages agonising about what strings should be used for in Jelly (e.g. arithmetic builtins used to work on characters), and decided that this approach works for the moment
the character array approach has some very obvious advantages, the only downside being it's harder to have string overloads that aren't simply character by character (and then jelly not really having those either is a different problem)
A good string type behaves the same as an array of characters 90% of the time. It just gives you the flexibility to make it better for places where it doesn't make sense.
jelly is (surprisingly for how golfy it is) actually not that well optimized for golfing IMO - no overloading, a lot of errors or useless behavior around strings, etc. but it's insanely good for array manipulation and math
@cairdcoinheringaahing ah :/ and those are just overloaded between real/complex. lol
Overloading doesn't have to be an all or nothing thing; a lot of the time a good overload is just doing the same thing you would with no overloading at all.
yuno has one builtin that toggles between them. it's probably a rather stupid idea. i haven't worked on yuno in a while and might just give up and restructure the whole thing
There are many areas where Jelly could be improved. Given that it's 5 years old and hasn't had any changes for close to 3 years, it's crazy that it's so dominant
Honestly, if I can be bothered to begin on Jam, I feel like it could be crazy strong against Jelly. My intent is to rework the builtin list to improve it, and add in a whole bunch of various improvements, but I just haven't had the motivation
thing is i'd rather just try to actually get good at using jelly's behavior or make a more optimized / actually unique language lol
though tbf uniqueness isn't necessarily required; we do see farther by standing on the shoulders of giants or whatever that newton (or whoever) quote was
Ash was going to have \xyz as a way to write operators with pure ASCII, and the online interpreter would automatically condense those down to the actual characters
Too much activity is often indicative of a main site that's sort of too big to handle (SO, MSE), and a very inactive meta suggests that the main site is dead
> In my personal opinion, I consider GolfScript to be part of Golfing 101, and certainly every "professional" golfer I know of knows how to read GolfScript at the very least, and most know how to write it too
Assuming we count as "professional" golfers, this has aged poorly :P
> I don't see how not knowing GolfScript for golf is like trying to read Japanese without knowing Kanji. It's more like trying to street race in a Civic while someone else had the audacity to participate in an F1 car.
If Golfscript is an F1 car, is Jelly an airplane taking off? :P
