you'd have three counters, but {...} uses the tos to determine looping... which is probably ok considering that 3 cell bf needs one of its counters to be 0 to determine looping
@ConorO'Brien you can't get anything from under the highest value though
there's no way to get anything from a stack but the height and the latest pushed value
so you have 2 counters which can store any integer, 2 counters which can only be incremented, and get incremented anytime you want to store in it's respective store counter, which can be combined to be one counter, by using the difference between stack height
basically the stack is a value, and how many times a value has been put into the stack, rather than actually a stack
on a related note, i'm planning on implementing a quarterstaff2bf compiler in brainflak
No pop. So push is replace (...) and increase depth, () is one, <> is change stack, <...> is ignore, [...] is negative, [] is depth, {...} is while loop.
Write a short program which takes in a positive number of seconds representing an age, and outputs an estimate of that time in English.
Your program must output the least precise amount of time which has past, among the following metrics and their lengths in seconds:
second = 1
minute = 60
hour...
yeah, so i think that the third stack probably makes it TC, because you can hold on to multiple values with it, even if they aren't held as well as on the "stack"
and this definition of quine means you can output a program which outputs a program which outputs a program which outputs itself, which a metaquine does not
Compile Quarterstaff to BF
The title is rather descriptive, except that it doesn't describe what Quarterstaff and BF are. For this challenge, i have created two languages: Quarterstaff, and a dialect of BF that probably already existed in it's exact form, but i wanted to be certain, especially w...
Concatenative languages are languages where juxtaposition of functions represents composition. Programs consist of the primitives in the language combining to form a large function which takes program input as its argument and whose return value is written to output.
In many concatenative langua...
Compile Quarterstaff to BF
The title is rather descriptive, except that it doesn't describe what Quarterstaff and BF are. For this challenge, i have created two languages: Quarterstaff, and a dialect of BF that probably already existed in it's exact form, but i wanted to be certain, especially w...
Can any close-voters explain? Re @FryAmTheEggman : Is that OK now? I have added the explanation for every symbols appearing in the expression. — user202729Mar 12 at 11:43
There are 138 terminal positions after assuming symmetries.
91 (X)
44 (O)
3 (tie)
But how to get the 26,830 possibilities, from where I can extract and print this number?
The code I'm using created by @Chas Brown
Original question: Here
import re
from collections import Counter
FLIP_XFRM ...
Build a golfing language with me
Tags: interpreter answer-chaining multiple-holes (maybe)
Our community has found it necessary to create a set of languages designed specifically for golfing, "golfing languages" as we call them. Such languages have evolved from the once brilliant, now clunky Gol...
I feel like it's more appropriate to hand out +15 to someone that came up with an unbeatable (within 2 weeks) strategy rather than to someone that just didn't break the chain.
Anyway, I don't see how things like: Answer X is ABCD. This adds E, a shorthand for CD: Yay, my answer is now ABE and the chain goes on!... Though the idea is good
Preventing the creation of trivial 'shorthands' would be quite difficult. On the other hand, I don't want it to get to 20 answers in, each going "I added a ... builtin, my score is now 1 for this challenge".
One solution I can see, but don't really like (and it has its own flaws), is having a hidden set of 20 questions instead, where only I know the questions and try and craft solutions for each new submission
Unfortunately preventing things like this might require the use of slightly subjective common sense, which we unfortunately can't use when writing challenges on PPCG
That's actually something I dislike about writing challenges. Sometimes the best response to "What about if I do this?" or "Why doesn't this break a rule?" is to use some common sense, but we can't say that in the actual specification.
Banning builtins is actually fairly easy: Use a bit of common sense. What is specifically designed for this challenge? It's banned. Does it have general applications? It's fine
I literally have 3 challenges ready to post (I don't want to sandbox any of them) and I can't tap the "Post" button because I'm afraid they won't be well received. I didn't feel this when I started writing challenges on PPCG
It wouldn't really be much of a challenge if it was just golfing the solution to one answer. Making it multi-part is the only way it can really work as a proper answer-chaining
Going through this, answer-chainings are an interesting corner case. The duplicate point already doesn't apply, as the multitask part isn't the premise of the challenge, so identifying a duplicate doesn't rely on the challenges used. There's no point copying other answers, as you're aiming to golf them. Finally, they already have been posted as separate challenges.
That point seems as though it only applies when you can break up the whole challenge into the subtasks, which can't be done as far as I can see.
Source
Given a decimal digit in BCD format in cell a[0][3] to a[0][0] (so 8 will be represented as an 1 in a[0][3], and 2 be one in a[0][1]), you are required to output its 7-seg expression in a[10][0] to a[10][6].
Converting Table:
a[0][3] a[0][1] a[10][6] a[10][4] a[10][2] a[10][0]
...