Talk:((()))(((())))=5

does thing evaluate within brackets? like (()(())) -> ((()))?

no dragon eater SIX SEVEN 11:46, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

IO?

Are you planning to add IO to your language? Your Truth-machine implementation gives some clue what might it be. --Blashyrkh (talk) 17:40, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

idk how io would work honestly Dragoneater67mobile (talk) 08:41, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

idk either, but you've already made it produce output (Truth-machine) and input single bit (ibid.). Quite a few, imho. --Blashyrkh (talk) 09:00, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

it doesnt produce output, truth machine just loops infinitely if I is one, xkcd random number just stores 4 and halts Dragoneater67mobile (talk) 09:03, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Oh, then I misunderstood it. I should have created an interpreter of my own and try your examples. Okay, since you're the only guru of this lang, maybe you can see a way to produce a value and put it somewhere where it can't be rewritten anymore. That might be the "output". What do you think? --Blashyrkh (talk) 09:20, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

interesting, maybe we can store the output in this format:

(A_0+1 A_1+1 ... A_n+1)

A_n is an ascii character at position n

what do you think? Dragoneater67mobile (talk) 09:27, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Don't get it, but maybe you didn't get me. I'll try to explain myself more clearly: the only rule is transformation of the leftmost top-level pair. So, if the transformation produces 3-tuple (and it's provable that it always does) then 3rd element is not accessible anymore. That's the output value (which might be () for '0' and (()) for '1'). Meanwhile, transformation continues (probably, to produce more output values). --Blashyrkh (talk) 09:42, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

anyway

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((()))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((()))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

is "Hi!" Dragoneater67mobile (talk) 10:12, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Can you make it shorter (e.g. with use of multiplications)? --Blashyrkh (talk) 10:14, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

maybe? you can try writing shorter code that generates that tuple(?)

so code with output looks like this:

(A)(B)(C)

where C is an ASCII code

ø = NUL

((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) = ! Dragoneater67mobile (talk) 10:24, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

And regarding the input: Zot approach looks powerful and crazy enough: input is not something that's given to a program; it's something that "happens" to a program (i.e. '0'-bit input and '1'-bit input are different transformations of a program; a program does not read; a program is written to be ready to be '0'-transformed or '1'-transformed). --Blashyrkh (talk) 09:30, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

thats cool Dragoneater67mobile (talk) 10:24, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

but could you elaborate? i still dont get it... Dragoneater67mobile (talk) 16:37, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

This is the original article: http://web.archive.org/web/20200414141014/http://www.nyu.edu/projects/barker/Iota/zot.html

But I don't suggest to copy its IO model. I just suggest to take a broader view at the input problem. Invent something... esoteric! --Blashyrkh (talk) 16:57, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Need help about syntax

uhhh... i didnt got the syntax... Also im the one that made bracky--Mrtli08 (talk) 09:30, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

i added colors and slightly changed the wording to make it easier to see whats going on, try reading again dragon eater SIX SEVEN 08:10, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks i got it --Mrtli08 (talk) 14:47, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

And you making Bracky is relevant because? (genuinely curious) --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 16:19, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Im sure its turing complete Google Gemini (an AI) is classifying Bracky as a markov algorithm which is turing complete and it calls this language as combinatory logic- Boom, it says Bracky is Thue WHICH IS A TURING TARPIT. --Mrtli08 (talk) 18:17, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

That still doesnt explain why it's relevant to the current conversation. Also, AI is 100% unreliable for this kinda stuff(because its very non trivial) --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 18:49, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

im not here for pepole to bash my opinion on "A.I." but at least IT KNOWS SOMETHING --Mrtli08 (talk) 19:07, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

no, it only PRENENDS to know something dragon eater SIX SEVEN 06:29, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Imho, it doesn't matter whether AI knows something or it doesn't. If you're an author and declare something about your language (e.g. Turing-completeness), you're bound to give solid proof and not "A.I. thinks it is". --Blashyrkh (talk) 06:49, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

yes --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 07:22, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

who talks about AI in 2026 anyway --Mrtli08 (talk) 16:47, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

I am a Bit Late?

Alright, so I might be wrong but is this how the syntax works:

((()))(()) -> (()) ?

Also, this is awesome. ----—A() (talk|contribs) 20:04, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

yes dragon eater SIX SEVEN 03:07, 27 February 2026 (UTC)