misc >> A very basic language in runes? :-)
by Stephen Rush » Wed, 24 May 2006 05:25:37 GMT
Cute, but not Turing-complete, since there is no subtraction and no way to
represent negative numbers, nor are there enough logical operators. You
need negation and at least ">=" in addition to equality. Using the same
sign for assignment and equality is no problem; FORTRAN and most BASIC
dialects still do it. Of course, it wouldn't be difficult to map "AND",
"OR" and "NOT" to arbitrary runes, and to provide subtraction and
arithmetic negation. The real bitch is the use of only one parenthesis
sign. That prohibits nested parentheses, which would lead to some
excruciatingly ugly code.
What's the current record holder for smallest Turing-complete language,
anyway? Brainfuck comes to mind, but I dimly recall an even smaller
language, designed to run in 256 bytes (No, that's not a typo!) of RAM on
an 8080.