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:No-code esolang
This concept is incoherent. Corbin (talk) 15:32, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
Why? --None1 (Nope.) 11:58, 24 November 2025 (UTC)
- Because a language is definitionally a set of sentences encoded in some alphabet. An interpreter which only accepts the empty language is equivalent to a machine which has no input at all, and study of that machine has nothing to do with programming languages. The fact that there are zero examples in the article and no outgoing links suggests that it can't be instantiated. Incoming links are very weak and themselves incoherent; for example, does Brainfucking take input or not?
- Note that, in general, I want joke concepts to either be categorized or deleted. I don't care which. Corbin (talk) 16:20, 24 November 2025 (UTC)
This concept is thought-provoking to me due to edge cases like "a language that ignores the program it's given and always compiles it into a brainfuck interpreter". (This isn't even just theoretical, e.g. Easy effectively works like this, although the details of that language are somewhat unclear.) Sometimes the distinctions between a program and the input to that program get blurry. --ais523 10:50, 30 May 2026 (UTC)