4 ms·
Indeed. I am the writer of this blog post and Matthew and I never intended for this to be a joke. In fact, we thought we had programmed something unique that no
by ret2pop 2y ago
Indeed. I am the writer of this blog post and Matthew and I never intended
for this to be a joke. In fact, we thought we had programmed something unique
that nobody had done before, and the bootstrapping code syntax is minimal by
design (you don't want to assume a default complicated syntax).
- vidarh 2y agoSince you're here, note that I can't resize your text on Chrome on Android by default, and so I can't read your page on my phone at all without my glasses without switching the browser to desktop mode.
- ret2pop 2y agoOof. I'll fix that in some time.
- BoiledCabbage 2y agoI think it's a really beautiful and innovative thing you've made here. And you should be proud of it. I think a lot of people on HN nowadays can only see the world through the lens of Javascript and as a result really can't appreciate what this is.
- jihiggins 2y agoi think you might lose people in the transition from the turing tape machine style bootstrapping to using full "words" for operations. it might help to compare it to something like regexes? (obviously they're not similar in the way that forth / stack langs are, but they're more commonly known and more commonly thought of as useful) i think it'd also help a lot to have some gifs of the state machine operating on stuff or maybe you could have something with "syntax" highlighting. a navigable timeline that changes the highlighting based on the current ignore lists and / or stack contents as you step through the code could be neat