Esoteric Programming Languages

« first day (548 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (848 days later) »

12:01 AM

BTW, the code to get the number 9 is ++[++[++[++[++[++[++[++[++[+[]][+[]]][+[]]][+[]]][+[]]][+[]]][+[]]][+[]]][+[]]]‌[+[]]

ais523

@ATaco you can use + rather than ; in most cases

ETHproductions

Oh wait, ++[++[++[++[++[++[++[++[``==``][+[]]][+[]]][+[]]][+[]]][+[]]][+[]]][+[]]][+[]] saves 6 bytes

ais523

@ETHproductions was AFK for a while but I thought of setting toString while I was gone

ETHproductions

@ais523 Hah, I thought of your (unsuccessful) method of recursion while AFK as well

ais523

[[]["constructor"]["a"]=[]]+[[]["constructor"]["a"]["toString"]=Function`alert(3)`]+[[]["constructor"]["a"]+[]]

that's a working piece of code that assumes we have strings but nothing else

and by changing the "a" to other letters, or longer strings, we can create as many callable functions as we like

we can also create cons cells (by assignment) and destructure them; that gives us unlimited, structured data storage

and we can place two function names into an array and index into the array to choose a function to call; that gives us if

with recursion for while, that's TC

I'm going to post it

ATaco

12:08 AM

Write 99 Bottles in it

ais523

it's TC, it's not IO-complete

or, well, it might be IO-complete but not on our current knowledge

ETHproductions

@ais523 I'm working on a Gist of the full alphabet

ATaco

Do we have no method of outputting arbitrary strings?

ais523

you can take input, but you can't produce output except at the end of the program, and you can only output text that's in the alphabet

ETHproductions

@ATaco We have no method of outputting atm

ATaco

12:10 AM

Curses

ais523

also you can't test input except by comparing it to strings you can create

(the only reason you can take input is that prompt works just fine with the argument that ``gives it)

ETHproductions

But we don't have prompt... do we?

ais523

oh, no p?

ETHproductions

No, and no way of accessing arbitrary global variables

ais523

oh right, prompt's a global

I'm writing an answer on the Turing completeness challenge now

wait, how do we get 0?

ETHproductions

12:21 AM

+[]

ais523

oh, duh

thanks

ETHproductions

I found a way to save 4 bytes on all numbers above 1, though it makes it quite a bit less repetitive. Is it worth it?

ais523

I was trying to do it with =

@ETHproductions less repetitive? sure, that makes it more interesting, not less so

ETHproductions

12:36 AM

The code for "constructor" is 1087 bytes long

What have we done

ATaco

We've created an Anti-Golf-Lang

ETHproductions

Oh, BTW, this "language" actually has major cross-browser differences

ATaco

Of course it does, gosh darn Javascript.

ETHproductions

Literally the only thing that isn't standardized in the entirety of ECMAScript is the Function.prototype.toString function

Chrome gives function() { [native code] }, while Firefox gives function() {\n\s\s\s\s[native code]\n}

\s being a space

ASCII-only

\n being a newline

ETHproductions

12:42 AM

Well that one should be obvious

Anyway, the index of v in []["fill"]+[] is 4 more in Firefox than it is in Chrome

I don't know that we use v anywhere though

ETHproductions

12:55 AM

Here's what I have so far

I'll add more when I have time

ais523

1:16 AM

A: Fewest (distinct) characters for Turing Completeness

JavaScript (ES6), 5 characters Thanks to @ETHproductions and @Taco for helping with this; this was a group project, and although the original idea was mine, many of the details are theirs. []+=` It's fairly well established that any Javascript program can be written with the characters ([]()+...

also, we don't use v, at least not for the Turing-completeness proof

ETHproductions

Sweet mother of monkey milk, [].fill.a=1;[].fill.a==1 returns true

That'll save us about 1000 bytes on variable names

ais523

oh wow, you're golfing it already :-)

is it worth storing pieces of strings as properties of fill, too?

constructor seems like a useful string to store

maybe even Function's constructor itself could be stored there

ETHproductions

A call to []["fill"] is 169 bytes

So probably

ais523

that's got to be cheaper than quite a few of the letters we have

even allowing for the need to construct a property name

ETHproductions

Since c is []["fill"][3], it's definitely longer

@ais523 Skimming through your post, I don't see where you first demonstrate the generation of S

ais523

1:21 AM

> So for example, we can do [[]+[]][+[]]["constructor"] to get at the constructor for a string, whose name is String, and then stringify it to get at the capital S character.

the first use listed for constructor

ETHproductions

Yes, sorry, I guess I looked too fast

ais523

it's the last letter we generate, I think

ETHproductions

Too bad we can't define our own property on Array.prototype, that'd probably let us save most of those 169 bytes

ATaco

...Can't we?

ETHproductions

We don't have p

ATaco