5 ms·
I would say Brainfuck is even easier.
by dysoco 13y ago
I would say Brainfuck is even easier.
- gngeal 13y agoReally? I'd say that a Forth compiler in Forth is going to be somewhat smaller than a Brainfuck compiler in Brainfuck.
- Falling3 13y agoWell probably... but no one said anything about bootstrapping being a requirement.
- gngeal 13y agoThe LiSP book only describes self-hosting implementations while in Forth it's heresy to implement it in anything else than Forth or assembly. Well, perhaps Java implementations are excused for not being implemented in terms of themselves. :-)
- dasmoth 13y agoIt's been done: http://jikesrvm.org/ http://jikesrvm.org/ Historically, the performance was pretty decent. I don't know how it stacks up against Hotspot today, but I note it does still seem to be a live project after >10 years.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- peterwaller 13y agohttp://www.hevanet.com/cristofd/dbfi.b http://www.hevanet.com/cristofd/dbfi.b
- tromp 13y agoWe are talking about interpreters here, not compilers. Binary Lambda Calculus has both Forth and Brainfuck beat, with a BLC interpreter in BLC of only 206 bits (under 26 bytes).
- gngeal 13y agoAre you sure? From where I stand, it looks as though andrewvc and betterunix were both talking about compilers rather than interpreters, while dysoco didn't specify either, so I inferred that the compiler topic still stood.
- tromp 13y agoI thought dysoco hinted at the brainfuck self-interpreter, as linked to by peterwaller. There acutally is a brainfuck compiler called awib (http://code.google.com/p/awib/ http://code.google.com/p/awib/), but it's not that small (very artistic though). So I assumed the discussion had drifted into interpreter territory...
- doktrin 13y agoInterpreter, sure. Why would a BF compiler be particularly easy?