@RedwolfPrograms they're clearly related and that's about it
i haven't actually spent enough time with brachylog v1 to get a really good feel for it but it's got some big differences in various aspects of its design
not sure how many of the differences can just be chalked up to without versus with sbcs though; i vaguely recall there's an even stronger reliance on pairs and such due to not having a concept of a subscript, and come to think of it i'm not sure i've actually figured out how it does metapredicates at all
also worth noting that a ton of symbols got reassigned even within ascii
,; did what ∧∨ do (echoing their functions in prolog), but now they perform list-building operations of which i think one was performed by the now completely-unassigned : but i can't find it in the wiki's edit history
yeah the ss must've been taken just for this ss, or it was edited
i can only think of a handful of users who would know what the non-apl orchard is, that would be in flax, and none of them would be in maid cafe and japanese language
in fact japanese language and maid cafe currently (and usually) has an intersection of exactly one user
CMP: Should the scan of a ragged list scan (\x _->x+1) 0 [1,3,8,[2,9,7,5,],8,[3,[6]],2] look like: [1,2,3,[4,5,6,7,],5,[6,[7]],7] or like: [1,2,3,[4,5,6,7],8,[9,[10]],2]? The first one branches when it encounters nesting treating the list as a tree while the second completely scans the substructure before continuing the main scan treating it as a list with extra parentheses.
People like too much to simplify things. When you have this expression,
1 + 2 * 3
How would you know whether the answer is 7 or 9? It should be made clear by adding parentheses.
1 + (2 * 3)
Even with something like this.
1 + 2 + 3
It doesn't matter whether it's evaluated (1 + 2) + 3 or 1 + (2 ...
Given a lower case string. Ex:
s = 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'
The goal is to make every other vowel uppercase.
Desired output here:
abcdEfghijklmnOpqrstuvwxyz
As you can see, from aeiou, \$`e`\$ and \$`o`\$ get uppercased.
For aeiou, the desired output is:
aEiOu
There are only lowercase char...
It would probably be an interesting challenge too, since it's either essentially a kolmo/compression challenge if you hardcode the optimal moves, or a challenge to write a Tic-Tac-Toe optimizer, and it's tough to say which approach would actually be golfier
Oh wow, I returned to school after a two week break and the wi-fi isn't totally broken?
Wow, they must have executed their whole IT department and hired people who actually know things
I had to go into the parsing debugger on my language ranking system, find the IDs of answers that used it, and then go to them and find the links in the header
Hi, I have a question: what is the usual method for calculating byte count (outside of tio)? I see a lot of answers from golfing languages such as Vyxal and Osabie that use 2 byte or 3 byte chars but count them as 1 byte (The method I use is open a node repl and do new TextEncoder().encode("œO").length //3 for example
Is this my output?
Decision problem: Is the input one of your output values?
Example: if input is "True" or "False", output "True", else output "False"
Basically, an interpreter just takes some string of bytes and does something with it. An SBCS considers every one of those bytes to be its own character, compared to UTF-8 which treats characters higher than 0x7f differently.
So you could, within strings, interpret those bytes as UTF-8 instead of using your code page if you wanted to
You could even invent your own UTF-8-like encoding
Not really. The thing is, "string" and "character" are a bit vague
You can't count all 0x10ffff characters in Unicode as one byte, because no encoding could do that. But you can count any 256 characters as one byte, or you could count something like 64 as one byte and 49152 as two bytes, or you could use UTF-8 or UTF-16 or even UTF-32.
I really want to use something like Huffman encoding for an existing golflang to make it shorter, but I tried on Husk and it just made everything longer :(
@RedwolfPrograms But it would, at least, give you the option of using a symbol that makes sense for the builtin rather than whatever digraph you had available.
@DLosc We could honestly do this already. Pick a character like ⍝ outside the codepage and replace all occurrences of some digraph AB with ⍝. Totally legal and it'd help with copy pasting maybe
I've tried 6 and 7 bit code pages, problem is, you end up with things like 14-bit programs, so for short programs it does no good, and for long ones the lack of more specific built-ins hurts more than it helps
One idea could be a code page that maps multiple characters to a byte
So it could be all ASCII, but with the golfiness of an SBCS
@Komali The basic rule we've landed on is this: For any program in an SCBS language, you must be able to create an actual file on disc with the claimed byte count that you can pass to your interpreter and it executes the claimed program.
Task
A reverse checkers position is a chess position where every piece for one player is on one colour and every piece for the other player is on the other colour. Your task is to find if the given (valid) position meets these criteria.
For example, this position does (click for larger images). E...
And our consensus is that bytes are octets, so presumably that implies you can't run your code on a non-octet system and still count it (unless you provide a way to map that code to bytes)
@RedwolfPrograms There are at least two ways to do this. 1) You can design a miniature embedded file system to store files in your language that can store files of non-integer byte counts sequentially. 2) Even if programs need padding functions don't, because the relevant score for a function is how much it adds to the program to declare/envoke it.
Neither of these is at all in conflict with the meta consensus, in fact they follow from our consensuses.
These two solutions are arguably actually one solution wearing two different faces.
This feels like something we need to explicitly discuss on Meta, given that at least Redwolf and I are surprised by it and thought the policy was something else. (Pleasantly surprised, in my case, but still surprised.)
@pxeger It's best if all the bounty amounts for the Best Ofs are the same amount (+500 typically), do you mind if I add a note saying I'm happy to cover the +300 to your bounty to make it +500?
TFW you get points off on a test for answering "5844 unless you were born between February of 1884 and 1900, in which case it's 5843" to "if you turn 16, how many days have you been alive?"
The "correct" answer was 5840 >:|
@DLosc Would you be fine with me posting a meta question asking for consensus on this?
And I just threw in the 1900 bit because I like flexing my knowledge of time/date stuff that won't ever matter because we'll all be dead long before 2300
And because if even Microsoft Excel got it wrong, enough people don't know about the 1900 thing that I feel I need to spread the pain to others
I wish we could turn refashion years, days, hours, minutes, and seconds into reasonable units that didn't require leap years and pretending there are 24 full hours and whatnot
Military time is confusing to me because I'm not used to it, but it makes so much more sense than having the time be ambiguous unless accompanied by a sign bit
People like too much to simplify things. When you have this expression,
1 + 2 * 3
How would you know whether the answer is 7 or 9? It should be made clear by adding parentheses.
1 + (2 * 3)
Even with something like this.
1 + 2 + 3
It doesn't matter whether it's evaluated (1 + 2) + 3 or 1 + (2 ...
Given a lower case string. Ex:
s = 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'
The goal is to make every other vowel uppercase.
Desired output here:
abcdEfghijklmnOpqrstuvwxyz
As you can see, from aeiou, \$`e`\$ and \$`o`\$ get uppercased.
For aeiou, the desired output is:
aEiOu
There are only lowercase char...
Is this my output?
Decision problem: Is the input one of your output values?
Example: if input is "True" or "False", output "True", else output "False"
