Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ -¹ ² ³ °
| |
|
|
You are not logged in. #1 2008-11-06 20:15:09
Has anyone ever played around with …… brainf***? It is an unfortunately (albeit accurately) named Turing complete language with only eight single character commands: Code:++++++++++[>+++++++>++++++++++>+++>+<<<<-]>++.>+.+++++++..+++.>++.<<+++++++++++++++.>.+++.------.--------.>+.>. A couple years ago, I wrote a brainf*** program that printed out the first 43 (I think) numbers of the Fibonacci sequence, without reusing anyone else's code. Due to hardware or compiler limitations (can't recall which) anything beyond that would have been inaccurately calculated. I'll see if I can't dig up the code. Last edited by All_Is_Number (2008-11-06 20:15:46) You can shear a sheep many times but skin him only once. #2 2008-11-06 22:09:56
Re: Has anyone ever played around with …I read about it a few years ago, and was impressed by it's illegibility "The physicists defer only to mathematicians, and the mathematicians defer only to God ..." - Leon M. Lederman #3 2009-01-03 08:18:34
Re: Has anyone ever played around with …The reason why brainf*ck is such a nasty programming language is that it doesn't use assembler style nmemonics. A very long time ago I learnt a language called "CESIL" which is documented on the web. See http://www.obelisk.demon.co.uk/cesil/ The power of the languages is similar, but the programmer-hostile form of the programs means it is really hard to read. |