Talk:Sansism

Sansism without wire-crossing
How about this, for a proof that Sansism is Turing-complete even if wire-crossing is banned (much like Archway2): The proof is by showing that wire-crossing-less Sansism can emulate Brainfuck. The following equivalences are as usual: + + - -, , . . > ! < ##!## [ and ] need special treatment. The following equivalences are used: G1 [ >* *G2 1G ] *G>* - 2+G The * symbols indicate where the code enters and exits each block. The 1 and 2 have to be on corresponding rows; they can be moved up or down to allow for inner loops. A > is placed right at the start of the program. For instance, the (pointless) Brainfuck program +[-[>]-]+ becomes: G     G     G G     >!G>-G>+ - -   >-G +G >+G     +G which contains no wire-crossings. (The program slopes gradually from bottom-left to top-right). --ais523 12:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Interesting, but please, the wiki is really not a discussion board. We were using it that way before, but it sucked. Tell the forum about this matter. --Graue 02:02, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Multidimensional source format
At the moment, the spec makes no comment on this. I guess it's just left to the implementation. Still, ought it to be standardised?

The obvious way of approaching 3D is to use the FF character to separate planes of the program space. But to add more dimensions, one needs more plane break characters. Or maybe there's another way of approaching it.... -- Smjg 10:54, 16 November 2010 (UTC)