@AdmBorkBork You know what would be more impressive than that?

@moonheart08 You can't really have operator overloading and vectorization.

why not only have select operators vectorize

and have a secondary atom enable vectorization for other ops

@Dennis Perhaps for commands that operate on both strings and numbers, such as have ceiling perform uppercase on strings

Jelly doesn't have a string type. jli may not even have a character type. Not sure yet.

Is Jelly v2 really going to be called jli, or are you messing with us?

$ pwd
/home/dennis/jellylanguage/jli

@Dennis so you're going for the array-of-Unicode-codepoints approach to strings?

@Dennis I like how you consider jli to be Jelly's child instead of having Jelly as its idol

@Pavel Sort of. jli most likely won't have implicit I/O, so how you print the result of a function is up to the caller.

oh wait, you actually pinged me a little while before opening chat, since it came to my inbox...

@Dennis Is the aim of jli to be golfier than Jelly?

Absolutely.

@Dennis Maybe you could at least have the output of an atom vary depending on the order of the input types? so an array plus a number would act different from a number plus an array.

@Dennis So wouldn't explicit I/O make it longer?

I think caird is kind of bewildered by the lack of implicit I/O

ninja

@cairdcoinheringaahing not if all your submissions are functions

@cairdcoinheringaahing You'll just be far more likely to submit a function than a full program to any given challenge that accepts functions.

ninja'd

You don't really need to care too much about allowing variable ordering of input

So functions would take arguments and return implicitly, but full programs would require a call to stdin/stdout?

← 24 messages moved from The Nineteenth Byte

@cairdcoinheringaahing Input may still be implicit via command-line arguments. Not sure yet. Output would require a call to printf or whatever.

@Dennis add a way to add new commands using shared libraries (.so) or i'll riot :p

Why shared objects of all possible ways to extend a language?

Wait. Oh jelly is in python. Hurr. (Just got off the bus)

@Dennis Are you modifying Jelly for Jli or writing it from scratch?

I'm starting from scratch.

@Dennis Are you planning on using the same code page? Will the monadic/dyadic chain rules for argument assignment be different from Jelly?

I know it's maybe early I'm just curious

@dylnan Both will most likely change. I'm currently toying with a sub-byte encoding and several different approaches to chaining.

@Dennis Forgive my ignorance, but what's a "sub-byte encoding"?

Fewer than 256 characters?