> > > On Sat, Oct 5, 2024 at 8:11 PM Hundred Rabbits <rabbits@100r.co> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I was just re-reading James' email about how the collapseOS mailing list
> > >> wasn't conductive to talking about broader topics, I was wondering if
> > >> this was a thing I might have missed or is shared thoughts and
> > >> experiment on the topic still welcome?
> > >>
> > >> I got lots of little experiments that might be interesting to share,
> > >> just wanted to make sure that it was fine to do so and that I haven't
> > >> missed the memo or anything.

It's fine. Whatever was on topic on the private list is on topic here. The
"private" attribute of the old list was to encourage discussions that might not
have occurred in "broad daylight" due to inhibitions some people might have. It
worked well for a while, but since I observed that this type of discussion
stopped occurring a while ago[1], I thought we might as well have a typical
mailing list. This doesn't mean that these discussions became off topic.

I just hope it doesn't get too noisy, but as Bud would say, I guess we'll, just,
see.

On Sat, Oct 05, 2024 at 10:53:52PM -0500, Rett Berg wrote:
> I think that's the point of brainfuck, as the name implies. IIUC it's
> mostly as a puzzle for programmers.
> 
> I'd have to say this is likely not CollapseOS related, unless you could
> construct an ultra simple computer from this mode of computation or
> something

On the contrary, I find Fractran and Modal[2] very interesting and on topic.
It's one of those unbeaten paths where we can't know what it yields unless we
walk it.

If I *tell* a regular programmer about Forth's "stacks+dictionary+immediate"
concepts[3], it's likely that they will not grok it. They might even try Forth a
little bit with their mediocre expectations and still not grok it. A time
consuming effort has to be made to expand one's mind and have the right neurons
touch. Only then can you envision what the path might yield. At least it was
thus for me.

I haven't made those efforts to grok Modal and Fractran yet, but their brutal
simplicity make them intriguing. Does it mean they're better than Forth for
writing a USB driver? maybe not. Could they slim down the C compiler
implementation from 1300 lines of code to 300? Well, maybe?

In that case, I'm glad Devine spends time exploring those paths and report back
on his findings. It helps me decide if/when it's worth exploring myself.

Regards,
Virgil

[1]: my guess is that the list became too big.
[2]: https://wiki.xxiivv.com/site/modal mentioned on the list previously
[3]: "It allows you to easily make your own DSL" is a euphemism and sends that
regular programmer back in Ruby's arms. They can then live a life of bliss
thinking that Cucumber is awesome-what-can-Forth-possibly-have-over-this-stuff.

Thanks for clearing that up :)

The reason I brought Fractran is that I think one of my first time 
coming into contact with someone going way into the deep end of the pool 
was with the creator of DawnOS. Who saw the way computation was going 
and wanted to slice through using an OISC of similar scale as fractran.

https://esoteric.codes/blog/a-programming-language-with-only-one-command-and

 > Built on a subleq chip, with subleq a “One Instruction-Set Computer” 
(or OISC), a programming language/architecture with only a single 
command. Geri found its minimalism an antidote to the dystopia of the 
current computing world. He sees chip and OS development as essentially 
political acts in a market dominated by corporate inefficiency.

I'm not sure that fractran could be something like it, it's dramatically 
different than programming for RAM(Subleq included), but it has some 
equivalencies, there's a trick in Fractran to create stacks stored in 
prime encoded registers.

https://wiki.xxiivv.com/site/binary.html#stack

# TL;DR Here's how you create a stack where you're not supposed to:

A stack of zeros and ones can be encoded in a single number by keeping 
with bit-shifting and incrementing.

     Pushing a 0 onto the stack is equivalent to doubling the number.
     Pushing a 1 is equivalent to doubling and adding 1.
     Popping is equivalent to dividing by 2, where the remainder is the 
number.

 > They might even try Forth a little bit with their mediocre 
expectations and still not grok it. A time consuming effort has to be 
made to expand one's mind and have the right neurons touch.

I think we're the same, in this case, there's not even someone to tell 
you to try programming with these strange foreign schemes of computation 
because they rarely escape the dank corners of academia.

In any case, I think this fraction/multiply scheme has not even been 
considered as an archival system for digital preservation outside of.. here.

https://dercuano.github.io/notes/uvc-archiving.html

Thank you for coming to my TED talk.

Dll