Talk:Fungeoid

Can someone tell me what a fungeoid actually is? Is it funges like unefunge and trefunge, or is it languages that are similar to *funge? --Rune 01:41, 9 Sep 2005 (GMT)

Re: What is a fungeoid?

 * Presumably, a fungeoid would be a work similar to one of the *funges (mostly Befunge - 2D); e.g. PingPong. This is complicated by the fact that languages which are only loosely related to befunge by being 2D are often termed "fungeoid." I would take it as "resembling a funge" - A funge being a member of "a family of languages" - of which Funge-98 only mentions three, but theoretically includes any multi-dimensional or uniquely topological befunge-varient that possesses the same syntax and behavior.--Wildhalcyon 02:27, 9 Sep 2005 (GMT)

Change to category
I propose that this article is made into a category instead. --Rune 00:52, 22 Oct 2005 (GMT)


 * I agree with this comment. --Graue 17:09, 22 Oct 2005 (GMT)


 * Objection: the the 2-dimensional language category already contains most fungeoids. And if the Fungeoid category would be made, many languages would be labeled Fungeoid undeserved, because they were inspired on the idea of "2d" but not on befunge --Aardwolf 19:33, 22 Oct 2005 (GMT)


 * Maybe this article oughtn't exist at all then. Esolang isn't a dictionary, and you seem to suggest that what constitutes a fungeoid is a matter of contention among esoterics, which would render the term rather useless as a neutral way of classifying languages. Is the term used much anymore? Perhaps this article could redirect to Befunge, which might have a short mention of the term. --Graue 21:24, 22 Oct 2005 (GMT)


 * Good points. Perhaps we should just redirect this page to the 2-d category and write something about fungeoids there. Like The term Fungeoid is often used to describe two-dimensional languages which are similar to Befunge --Rune 12:07, 24 Oct 2005 (GMT)


 * I agree. The article as it is now contains essentially nothing, and the concept itself overlaps too much with 2D. --Ihope127 16:11, 23 Oct 2005 (GMT)


 * OK. If noone protests I'll go ahead and do that. That is, redirect to Category:Two-dimensional languages and include a description of the term there. --Rune 12:09, 24 Oct 2005 (GMT)


 * Seems like a fine idea to me --Aardwolf 12:24, 24 Oct 2005 (GMT)


 * I did the re-direct to Category:Two-dimensional languages, but it didn't work properly. The category members were not listed when you accessed the category via the fungeoid redirect. So I have reverted it back again. Any alternative ideas on how to handle this? Should we redirect to Befunge instead, and put the description there? --Rune 13:21, 24 Oct 2005 (GMT)


 * Sure. --Graue 14:28, 24 Oct 2005 (GMT)