The Groot Programming Language • Hacker News Board

Re: The Groot Programming Language

#21

Post by JoelHobson » Sat, Jan 31, 2015, 11:15 PM UTC

mwsherman wrote: post #16

It doesn’t have generics.

As long as I can implement a webserver in it.

Re: The Groot Programming Language

#22

Post by plumeria » Sat, Jan 31, 2015, 11:17 PM UTC

MichaelAza wrote: post #3

I propose a law of esoteric langauges: If there exists, in popular culture, a character with a comically limited vocabulary (e.g. Groot, The Librarian in Discworld) then there shall be a Brainfuck variant based on its vocabulary. (In our example, Grootlang and Ook)

That gives us one language for every Pokemon (i.e pika pika, pik pikachu, pikachuuu, pikachu!)

Re: The Groot Programming Language

#23

Post by leonatan » Sat, Jan 31, 2015, 11:22 PM UTC

I prefer ArnoldC: https://github.com/lhartikk/ArnoldC

Re: The Groot Programming Language

#24

Post by aortega » Sat, Jan 31, 2015, 11:24 PM UTC

Just want to point that this is just the basic instructions of a Turing machine, therefore this language is complete and equivalent to any other Turing-complete language.

Re: The Groot Programming Language

#25

Post by aortega » Sat, Jan 31, 2015, 11:27 PM UTC

michh wrote: post #7

Even though I got a laugh out of it, I propose we change the definition of esoteric programming languages to require more creativity from their designer than reimplementing brainfuck with different tokens for the operators.

Is not based in brainfuck, its a turing machine, and both look that way because any less instructions are not enough for programming a digital computer.

Re: The Groot Programming Language

#26

Post by mtrpcic » Sat, Jan 31, 2015, 11:35 PM UTC

guard-of-terra wrote: post #20

ihuman wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you flagging this? Flagging is for topics that are "spam or offtopic."

Is it on topic?

Somebody wrote a new language/turing machine based off of pop culture, I'd say that's pretty on-top for HackerNews.

Re: The Groot Programming Language

#27

Post by Retra » Sat, Jan 31, 2015, 11:43 PM UTC

aortega wrote: post #25

michh wrote: post #7

Even though I got a laugh out of it, I propose we change the definition of esoteric programming languages to require more creativity from their designer than reimplementing brainfuck with different tokens for the operators.

Is not based in brainfuck, its a turing machine, and both look that way because any less instructions are not enough for programming a digital computer.

Converting from groot to brainfuck requires simply a 1-1 command translation. It doesn't matter if these are turing machine operations, the point is that there is nothing 'esoteric' about writing down what a turing machine does using a language that everyone already knows.

If I rewrote C to use BEGIN and END instead of { and }, then that's not inventing an esoteric language, but new syntax for an existing language.

Re: The Groot Programming Language

#28

Post by Sir_Cmpwn » Sat, Jan 31, 2015, 11:49 PM UTC

Yet another brainfuck with different tokens. Can we show some more creativity?

Re: The Groot Programming Language

#29

Post by marvy » Sat, Jan 31, 2015, 11:51 PM UTC

JoelHobson wrote: post #21

mwsherman wrote: post #16

It doesn’t have generics.

As long as I can implement a webserver in it.

You can't (at least not without non-portable extensions), but you can write cgi scripts.

Re: The Groot Programming Language

#30

Post by failed_ideas » Sun, Feb 01, 2015, 12:00 AM UTC

I'm not sure why this is on hn. The creation of a programming language using a stupid syntax has been done, and has been done better. This adds nothing to the space, and it's the useless language equivalent of hello world. Good for you, you made your first hello world that is completely useless. But my hello world doesn't end up on hn, and nor should this.