Talk:Queuenanimous

Definition of [ and ]

As written, [ and ] destroy the queue elements they pop. Is this intentional? If it is, then the brainfuck translation works (although it's possible that the language is Turing-complete in a more interesting way). --ais523 23:34, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

[ destroys the queue element it pops; ] simply jumps back to its matching [. Will clarify in article. User:PythonshellDebugwindow (talk) 13:01, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

ais523 is correct. The reduction to 3-cell BF is incorrect because [ irreversibly destroys the cell it measures. It is unclear whether the language is TC as it stands, but I don't think 3 cell BF is the language to target. --Quintopia (talk)

Followup: the original proof was indeed incorrect, but the article now contains a new proof which avoids the problem by using only heavily restricted forms for the queue elements (meaning that after looping commands destroy queue elements, there is still enough information to unambiguously reconstruct them). --ais523 22:28, 18 August 2025 (UTC)