We are currently working on new rules for what content should and shouldn't be allowed on this website, and are looking for feedback! See Esolang:2026 topicality proposal to view and give feedback on the current draft.
Talk:Bitch, Ienai!
Bitch, Ienai!/Solution
we think information on the language the constraints are based off should be on its own subpage to avoid spoiling the puzzle --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 20:13, 3 October 2026 (UTC)
- Actually, including that on a subpage with how they were derived could be cool. --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 03:38, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
- yee lets do it --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 03:39, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
- I'll create the page and look through the IRC logs again --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 04:03, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
- oki! we'll probably work on it once you get to go onto irc again, or if we see some stuff we can reword and whatnot. also you should check out User:MarkFan8901/Sandbox, its a more fuller rewrite of the current page and we wanna know what you thnk & if its accurate before we put it on the main page --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 04:05, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
- here: Bitch, Ienai!/History and Spoilers. Also I'll check your sandbox! --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 04:09, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
- oki! we'll probably work on it once you get to go onto irc again, or if we see some stuff we can reword and whatnot. also you should check out User:MarkFan8901/Sandbox, its a more fuller rewrite of the current page and we wanna know what you thnk & if its accurate before we put it on the main page --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 04:05, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
- I'll create the page and look through the IRC logs again --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 04:03, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
- yee lets do it --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 03:39, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
what is a value, actually
are they like number values? can they hold things like entities and transformations? since the rules say transforms turn one value into another, then later says transforms can turn entities into other transforms. we're getting more confused the more we try to read into this --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 01:00, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
- I mean, thats for the solution to decide. --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 03:38, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
- we were gonna say cuz the two seemd to contradict each other, but we see thats been fixed now --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 03:39, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
- Yea lol. --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 04:02, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
- we were gonna say cuz the two seemd to contradict each other, but we see thats been fixed now --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 03:39, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
rename constraint language?
the term 'constraint language' could be confused for wikipedia:Constraint programming, and we've actually seen the term elsewhere used to refer to languages which utilize constraint programming (the main source for this wiki's page on Declarative paradigm). we wanna rename them to puzzle languages but am posting this here for if yall have any objections to that --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 05:58, 11 October 2026 (UTC)
- puzzle is not very specifying of what it is. "rule language" or something similair is probably closer. Allso, it makes sense constraint languages and declarative paradigm languages have similair names sometimes. One describes the other. --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 07:09, 11 October 2026 (UTC)
- perhaps there's forms of constraint language we haven't discovered yet where 'puzzle' would be a more adept name. another name idea might just be 'language set', since that's also more accurate to the fact that they arent quite "languages" as much as they are a category of languages where members are to be solved for. also, despite the similarities between this and declarative programming, we dont think they're similar enough to warrant language which can easily mix them up (especially since the concept of a constraint language is much newer (to our awareness) than constraint programming). this is also not to mention constraint languages don't have to parallel declarative programming, which would make declarative programming terms in their discussion even less apt --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 07:30, 11 October 2026 (UTC)
- tldr we're putting the term 'language set' on the table --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 07:31, 11 October 2026 (UTC)
- Thats just language family, which is way to general of a term as well. The thing is a constraint language as defined is quite a specific concept. Fill-in language is a possibility, since you "fill into" the "shape" the rules make. --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 08:18, 11 October 2026 (UTC)
- yeah the tension here is that 'constraint language' is a great way to describe them, but also its very easily confusable with constraint programming (and is already used to refer to languages with constraint programming by other people). could we just nuke the concept of constraint programming instead /j --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 08:24, 11 October 2026 (UTC)
- Lmao. *googles synonyms for constraint*. --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 08:34, 11 October 2026 (UTC)
- yeah the tension here is that 'constraint language' is a great way to describe them, but also its very easily confusable with constraint programming (and is already used to refer to languages with constraint programming by other people). could we just nuke the concept of constraint programming instead /j --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 08:24, 11 October 2026 (UTC)
- Thats just language family, which is way to general of a term as well. The thing is a constraint language as defined is quite a specific concept. Fill-in language is a possibility, since you "fill into" the "shape" the rules make. --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 08:18, 11 October 2026 (UTC)
- tldr we're putting the term 'language set' on the table --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 07:31, 11 October 2026 (UTC)
- perhaps there's forms of constraint language we haven't discovered yet where 'puzzle' would be a more adept name. another name idea might just be 'language set', since that's also more accurate to the fact that they arent quite "languages" as much as they are a category of languages where members are to be solved for. also, despite the similarities between this and declarative programming, we dont think they're similar enough to warrant language which can easily mix them up (especially since the concept of a constraint language is much newer (to our awareness) than constraint programming). this is also not to mention constraint languages don't have to parallel declarative programming, which would make declarative programming terms in their discussion even less apt --MarkFan8901 (talk | contribs) 07:30, 11 October 2026 (UTC)