Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Zyme – An Evolvable Programming Language

zyme.dev

11–20 of 27 posts

Re: Show HN: Zyme – An Evolvable Programming Language

#12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly not. When I was developing Zyme, I was thinking a lot about the molecular components of a cell and how one might translate them into a virtual machine. I was particularly inspired by enZYMEs.

I just realized that that's what the oeigin of the deus ex drug must be as well lol

Zyme is an ancient Greek word that means leaven, a lot of organizations and companies use it

Re: Show HN: Zyme – An Evolvable Programming Language

#13
Interesting. I haven't seen much in this space since Lee Spector's "push" more than 20 years ago (http://faculty.hampshire.edu/lspector/push.html). I did see a mention of Push in the FAQ but it would be very interesting to compare this in detail. If I get it correctly Zyme programs are evolved on the bytecode level whereas Push's stack architecture is designed to be evolvable directly at the syntactic level? A head-to-head comparison / benchmark would be super interesting.

Re: Show HN: Zyme – An Evolvable Programming Language

#15
post #13

Interesting. I haven't seen much in this space since Lee Spector's "push" more than 20 years ago ( http://faculty.hampshire.edu/lspector/push.html ). I did see a mention of Push in the FAQ but it would be very interesting to compare this in detail. If I get it correctly Zyme programs are evolved on the bytecode level whereas Push's stack architecture is designed to be evolvable directly at the syntactic level? A head…

Hampshire represent! I'm also quite interested in this space.

Re: Show HN: Zyme – An Evolvable Programming Language

#20

Adding a toggle between bytecode and (dis)assembly would make help with visualizing what kind of effect mutation has.

You're right - a disassembler would be incredibly valuable; and while I haven’t gotten around to implementing one yet, it’s definitely on my radar. But even the idea of even having an assembler is exciting because it suggests the output programs could be interpretable, enabling us to identify the underlying algorithms that (hopefully) emerge through evolution.
Post reply on HN