Talk:WhatLang

About whatlang with only symbols is tc

My friend Baichuan said it and then UrnEn and I proved it. First, we can get a 1 with "'"'"?(User:YufangTSTSU found it). Then we know we can define a varible with symbols. So we can simulate Minsky machine. Yup but these following does be found by User:UrnEn tho

1. Initialize a counter(we call it " here and below):"'"'"?"'"'"?-(")=_
2. Increment a counter: "'"'"?(")^+(")=_
3. Decrement a counter: "'"'"?(")^\-(")=_
4. Jump if it is zero: About converting, please look there:User:I_am_islptng/TCP1's another tc proof.

Because minsky machine is turing complete, whatlang with only symbols is TC!!--User:Cycwin

whatlang with six kinds of symbols is tc too!

The symbols are:'?+=^@.

1. Initialize a counter(call it ?):''''?'?=
2. Increment a counter:'?^'?''?+'?=
3. Decrement a counter:'?^'''??+'?=
4. While loop:This good idea is User:UrnEn's! He has even thought it a month ago(April)! We can use a variable to save the code with the name 1?. If it is true, we can get a 1 then concatenate with ? then we can run the code or not! The code is(...is the code will loop)'.'.+'.+''+'?+'^+''+''+''+''+'?+'?+''+'?+'++'^+'@+'?''?'?+='''?+''''?'?+='?^ ''''??'?+^@('.'.+'.+ just ...!)

yea but I hadn't prove it --UrnEn_ 14:33, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

oyebtw when WhatLang2025 is published when we can have particle chr@, then it is affirmative for some profs --UrnEn_ 14:36, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

nvm we can wait for WhatLang2026 now. --UrnEn_ 10:02, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Removed examples

These examples don't fit in the article quite well so I'll move them here: (original revision here)

yes but why

a range@ can also be implemented as:

¿:{1-!}1>|:{:1-:}]reverse@\_

when reverse@ can be implemented as:

¿:1>|len@:{1-:3>|&,&\]<:}__]

samely that's a len@:

¿:()#(_1)#\_","+[',g]'+repl@0\+@

and since repl@ requires RegExp, it can't easily be done in WhatLang... so I guess that's it.

Oh and with len@ we can easily do a join@:

¿2>|\:1>|<]01-,\01-$&&&"(\""\+"\"+)#"+@\_
len@:{1-'|\:{1-\'++\:}!}_@]
\""++]<

Just I don't think it's very static.

Another range@ len@ implementation???

range@:

1>|[]\0\:{&&len@&&&:&;&1-\1+\:}__]<

len@:

[0]\(__|1+])#_\<

---

Btw the talk page isn't a good place to post TC proof of the only-symbols variant of a language, perhaps should put that on a subpage or something DGCK81LNN (talk) 09:27, 30 June 2026‎ (UTC)