From Esolang
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Esolang or not?

I'm not sure I consider this an esoteric programming language (thus am not sure it should be linked to from the Language list).

Basically: If this is an esolang, why aren't APL itself, Plankalkül, and (insert your favorite obscure research language here) also esolangs? --Chris Pressey 00:18, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm... fair enough. I was initially thinking "esoteric" in the general sense—i.e., "intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest." Under this general definition, the nature behind the intent, design, and syntax of LYaPAS seems indeed esoteric, in my opinion. However, under the definition "of computer programming language design, as a proof of concept, or as a joke," this does not seem to be an "esoteric programming language." The quality of "to be hard to program in" arguably qualifies LYaPAS, though (cf. Esoteric programming language). Honestly, I had just forgotten about the specialized definition(s) of esoteric in the context of programming languages, I suppose. If this article is seen fit to be deleted, so be it. —Brian Krent 22:03, 13 February 2011 (EST)
Sorry, I saw your comments out of order (and maybe general philosophizing about what does or does not constitute an esoteric programming language would be better undertaken on Talk:Esoteric programming language anyway -- oh well.) Yes, "esoteric" is something of a "term of art" in this context, although a fairly flexible one. But also, if LYaPAS (and Chalcraft-Greene, etc) are things which do have relatively broad interest in the esolang community (and I could see that being the case), I don't have a problem with articles about them being on the wiki -- just questions about how to best categorize them.
I have been wondering lately, for instance, if we could do with a category of "honorary esolangs" -- languages that don't wholly fit the esolang idea, but which are impressive enough in some aspect that they deserve a mention. Languages I would immediately pick to be honorary esolangs are: Perl, Ursala, and BANCSTAR. Possibly LYaPAS would be a fit there as well. --Chris Pressey 05:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Yes, make a category of "honorary esolangs" that is separate page. I agree with this too. --Zzo38 22:06, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Not APL-like

LYaPAS doesn't seem to be based on APL. The first LYaPAS compilers appeared in 1963, same year when APL was first implemented at IBM. And the two languages are just too different.

It's unclear why states that LYaPAS is an extension of APL. --Amakukha (talk) 20:47, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

What version of LYaPAS are these symbols from?

LYaPAS-70 doesn't seem to have symbols ⇐, ɪ, ⊻, ↓, ↑, ↗, ↙. These are not even in the codepage. Where did they come from? --Amakukha (talk) 12:40, 10 September 2020 (UTC)