Talk:Glypho

There's been some question as to whether the instruction set provided by Glypho is Turing Complete. I've written up a theoretical spec for a brainfuck-derivative that uses the same stack functions called Ouroboros - the only changes being:

0 - push a 0 instead of a 1 onto the top of the stack (can emulate with 11-+ in Glypho) + - increment top of stack (can emulate with 1+) - - decrement top of stack (can emulate with 1-+)

and the removal of NOP, Add, Negate, Multiply, and Reverse. The full theoretical-spec is at: http://www4.ncsu.edu/~bcthomp2/ouroboros.txt Does anyone have objections to whether or not this psuedolanguage is TC, thus making Glypho TC? --Wildhalcyon 04:30, 20 Sep 2005 (GMT)

Reminds me of Stuck, an esolang I made not worth mentioning that I'm going to mention anyway. It has a stack with 1-byte wrapping integers and commands equivalent to the Glypho +1[]io plus subtracting and flipping the stack. And I'm pretty sure both Stuck and Ouroboros (and Glypho, obviously) are turing complete. --BodyTag 08:59, 20 Sep 2005 (GMT)

Python interpreter

I wrote an interpreter for it in Python at this TIO link. Hope this helps! :) --Monochromeninja, Python programmer (talk) 20:25, 3 June 2021 (UTC)