Talk:Powder

Fibonacci sequence, factorials etc.

I didn’t know we are a part of the OEIS now. Any comments of why those example programs should be so large? —arseniiv (talk) 13:36, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

I try to put as many example data into the programs as possible just to make the data range larger. (And partially, I want the readers to think that Powder is very low-level.) --A (talk) 10:42, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

I think it shouldn’t be done that way. —arseniiv (talk) 10:49, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

According to your reply, I limited my program data. This should be okay. (I can't limit the data of the Deadfish interpreter, because without these data it will not function well.) --A (talk) 11:07, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

If you have to put in extra data to increase the data range then I think that makes it not Turing-complete, but the 'Smallfuck with an infinite tape' example suggests otherwise - could you write a full implementation? The semantics of the language also seem a bit underspecified, can you clarify a bit? Rdococ (talk) 10:34, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

For that matter, what is the & operator? Why do I only see it in one example and not the instruction list? Rdococ (talk) 13:05, 27 December 2022 (UTC)