From Esolang
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Appears to be NOT turning complete

Because the loops don't nest.

Brainfuck Converted
init *vLS:0 *vRS:0 *vCS:0 *vOO:0 *vMC:256 *vTA:0
> vRS*:256 vRS+:vCS vCS:vLS vLS/:256 vTA:vCS/vMC vTA*:vMC vCS-:vTA
< vLS*:256 vLS+:vCS vCS:vRS vRS/:256 vTA:vCS/vMC vTA*:vMC vCS-:vTA
+ vCS+:1 vTA:vCS/vMC vTA*:vMC vCS-:vTA
- vCS+:255 vTA:vCS/vMC vTA*:vMC vCS-:vTA
. fOP(vCS) N/A but probably using a large number of if statements
, N/A
[ %(vCS.:vOO)
] **missing**

However, a BF interpreter (in BF) needs only a limited number of nesting levels as the 'guest' program's stack can be stored in the main array. This limited nesting level could be implemented here by making every while loop a function. Each while loop would then take one of the 676 names. This is sufficient for existing BFinBF interpreters of which User:keymaker's will give unbounded cells and Daniel B. Cristofani's can nest to the cell depth.

Therefore, this language is Turing complete assuming unbounded integer variables.

Furthermore: IMO the lack of loop nesting looks like an oversight, in that event the TC proof becomes direct.

Rdebath (talk) 09:34, 7 September 2014 (UTC)