2003-01-21.txt:10:09:59: <dbc> That one is NYYRIKKI's brainfuck version.
2003-01-21.txt:10:22:19: <lament> hm, there doesn't seem to be a mandelbrot generator in brainfuck
2003-01-21.txt:10:38:47: <lament> besides, i have a magic brainfuck preprocessor
2003-01-21.txt:11:04:44: <lament> problematic on 8-bit brainfuck machines.
2003-01-21.txt:11:06:17: <lament> I think I just suck at brainfuck.
2003-01-21.txt:11:07:45: <dbc> Does brainfuck exist?
2003-01-21.txt:11:15:39: <dbc> (which is the 22nd google response for "brainfuck")
2003-01-21.txt:11:23:29: <fizzie> according to googlism, 'brainfuck is not sexy', 'brainfuck is the ultimate sexual experience', 'brainfuck is too obviously evil', 'brainfuck is too obviously evil' and 'brainfuck is now'.
2003-01-21.txt:11:33:37: <lament> "brainfuck is better than"
2003-01-25.txt:18:57:15: <exarkun> d'you know if the stack stack is shared between threads in concurrent funge?
2003-01-25.txt:18:57:54: <fizzie> each has its own stack.
2003-01-25.txt:18:58:07: <exarkun> yea, each has its own stack
2003-01-25.txt:18:58:16: <exarkun> but the docs don't say anything about the stack stack
2003-01-25.txt:18:58:52: <fizzie> wellll.. stack is just what's on top of the stack stack.
2003-01-25.txt:18:59:23: <fizzie> in befunge97 or 96 they had shared stacks, which sounds really, really sick.
2003-01-27.txt:22:09:28: <lament> Some guy in #forth wanted to write a Forth in Brainfuck
2003-01-27.txt:23:21:52: <lament> well if someone finds it offensive, fuck that btich!
2003-01-27.txt:23:43:24: <dbc> I don't think I can come up with a better representation offhand...here's what I'm working with: http://www.hevanet.com/cristofd/brainfuck/daniel.png
2003-01-30.txt:06:05:58: <lament> There's a guy in #forth who wants to write a forth in brainfuck.
2003-02-06.txt:19:50:00: <tav> so, besides brainfuck, what are other interesting esoteric languages?
2003-02-07.txt:05:06:00: <lament> "height in wavelengths"? What the fuck.
2003-02-13.txt:21:17:45: -!- Iceman01 changed the topic of #esoteric to: 'Brainfuck'
2003-02-13.txt:21:18:47: <Iceman01> does anybody know brainfuck?
2003-02-13.txt:21:22:58: -!- exarkun changed the topic of #esoteric to: Trefunge > Brainfuck
2003-03-15.txt:06:07:19: <lament> i've done too much stuff with brainfuck already.
2003-03-15.txt:08:33:14: <dbc> someone was also asking before about why the brainfuck golf rules prohibit both using numbers above 255, and assuming wraparound byte values, when one or the other will work in just about any implementation...
2003-03-15.txt:08:33:48: <dbc> but as you (lament) know, it's because the brainfuck golf rules are designed to require maximal portability.
2003-04-12.txt:13:33:26: <dbc> Well, it's as many 80-character lines as will fit in one K...it's twice the size of my UTM, which is the smallest Turing-complete brainfuck program so far...hm. No reason, really :)
2003-04-20.txt:01:51:43: <lament> Many people who are into Scientology don't suspect how fucked up it is, either
2003-05-07.txt:09:24:28: * SamB wonders what sexygirl153 is doing in #esoteric -- maybe she heard about brainfuck and got confused?
2003-05-17.txt:16:33:46: * t3rmin4t0r just setup a brainfuck webservice (a simple rot13) program
2003-05-21.txt:06:27:11: <dbc1> [Input a brainfuck program, then a !, then the input for the program.
2003-05-22.txt:13:54:18: <dbc> I figured out a new highly implementation-dependent brainfuck quine. It goes like this:
2003-06-19.txt:00:51:35: <dbc> Shaved another two bytes. random.b has undergone more revision than any other extant brainfuck program, I think.
2003-07-09.txt:03:25:27: <lament> Brainfuck does!
2003-07-09.txt:03:25:37: <Taaus> Then Brainfuck isn't a language.
2003-07-09.txt:03:26:54: <lament> (the brainfuck family)
2003-07-09.txt:03:29:20: <lament> anyway, any definition of programming languages which excludes brainfuck is morally wrong.
2003-07-09.txt:03:29:57: <Taaus> Not really... Brainfuck with limited memory can't execute all the programs a Turing Machine can.
2003-07-09.txt:03:30:09: <Taaus> Brainfuck _without_ limited memory is a programming language. No contest there.
2003-07-09.txt:04:09:41: <dbc> And I wouldn't broaden it too far. Stack machines are fine, but a four-function calculator isn't. Again, I'm trying to match common usage, which doesn't speak of "programming" anything very different from a computer...
2003-07-09.txt:04:11:07: <lament> Sorta like compiling Brainfuck to Ook.
2003-07-09.txt:04:13:19: <lament> In common usage, somebody says "HTML is a programming language, i learned it at school", and the response is "FUCK YOU!" *ban*
2003-07-12.txt:00:47:31: <andreou> power and shit...
2003-07-16.txt:17:27:59: <asdsa> do you really code in brainfuck ?
2003-07-16.txt:17:28:45: <asdsa> do you  know  anyone really coding in brainfuck 
2003-07-16.txt:17:31:25: <asdsa> i did it in brainfuck ??
2003-07-16.txt:17:35:00: <asdsa> http://esoteric.sange.fi/brainfuck/bf-source/prog/triangle.bf
2003-07-25.txt:08:18:05: <lament> It's like using C# instead of Brainfuck.
2003-07-26.txt:04:25:32: <andreou> well, if i direct him to the UHH he'll start shouting at me ``what kind of the worst lamer has written that piece of trinary shit''
2003-07-30.txt:19:52:11: <lament> Also they write Brainfork instead of Brainfuck
2003-07-30.txt:20:11:35: <lament> brainfuck was renamed?!?
2003-07-30.txt:20:26:40: <Taaus> What is your opinion on purists.org renaming Brainfuck to Brainfork?
2003-07-30.txt:20:29:57: <andreou> Well, from my point of view, they can rename it to DisneyDrum too. It will still be a great Brainfucking experience, no matter how it's called.
2003-07-30.txt:20:30:27: <Taaus> What does Ook give me that Brainfuck doesn't?
2003-07-30.txt:20:31:04: <lament> which uses exclamation marks for everything, but otherwise is just brainfuck.... without loops
2003-07-30.txt:20:31:08: <Taaus> I preferred the name 'straightfuck' that someone suggested ;)
2003-07-30.txt:20:31:56: <Taaus> The Brainfuck->Brainfork one?
2003-07-30.txt:20:32:00: <lament> Taaus: so they wanted to rename the language to "fuck"
2003-07-30.txt:20:32:08: <andreou> The Brainfuck->* one.
2003-07-31.txt:18:09:14: <lament> which includes brainfuck, but brainfuck is special
2003-08-06.txt:19:06:51: <`antilove> a  new brainfuck ?
2003-08-06.txt:19:20:43: <lament> but THIS is fucked up
2003-09-04.txt:02:28:14: <lament> Therefore, timbre can go fuck itself!
2003-09-04.txt:02:53:42: <lament> very shitty music, certainly.
2003-09-09.txt:01:41:17: <lament> Is doppelganger written in brainfuck?
2003-10-21.txt:00:49:56: <lament> that wouldn't be fucked up enough
2003-10-21.txt:00:50:58: <andreou> people, greet steve... steve is a neophyte brainfuck programmer who wants to extend it :)
2003-10-21.txt:00:51:41: <andreou> so we all need to make him BELIEVE that it's bad to extend brainfuck :)
2003-10-21.txt:00:51:43: <lament> wanting to extend brainfuck is a nasty disease that most people go through.
2003-10-21.txt:00:54:23: <andreou> oh, in comp.sys.hp48 there was an interesting thread in which two brainfuck compilers/interpreters crept up... i meant to summarize it and send it over to lang@ and fob
2003-10-21.txt:00:54:29: <calamari_> andreou: http://esoteric.sange.fi/brainfuck/impl/interp/calculator/casiobf.txt
2003-10-21.txt:00:55:13: <stevaras> can some1 tell me why o love brainfuck ?
2003-10-21.txt:01:00:21: <stevaras> brainfuck env under sgi environment
2003-10-21.txt:01:00:21: <stevaras> brainfuck d.kit under sgi environment
2003-10-21.txt:04:24:40: -!- lament has quit ("fuck").
2003-10-22.txt:03:31:30: <stevaras> or teach him bfuck
2003-10-22.txt:03:32:16: <andreou> lament "ante gamisou" is "fuck off"
2003-10-22.txt:03:37:23: <stevaras> or a forgotten cut dick
2003-10-23.txt:10:00:26: <dbc> Here's a question. Consider a language made of all the extensions yet proposed for brainfuck (insofar as they can be made consistent with each other), but not including the eight original brainfuck instructions. Is it Turing-complete?
2003-10-28.txt:02:22:22: <lament> this is also the home channel of the official centennial brainfuck golf contest.
2003-10-28.txt:02:23:04: <dx> how do you play golf with brainfuck
2003-11-21.txt:02:32:43: <Taaus> I'm not sure.. It doesn't have any looping constructs, as far as I can see... Although it might be possible to implement it with a stack.. Hmm.
2003-11-21.txt:02:37:34: <Taaus> Cool. I made it blow the stack with a loop.
2003-11-21.txt:02:39:07: <Taaus> @+<coord> is "push <coord> onto stack", @@<coord> is "do <coord> for each item in stack"
2003-11-21.txt:02:41:41: <Taaus> A stack operation counts as a <coord>. And { ... } is just to group more <coord>s as one <coord>.
2003-11-21.txt:02:42:42: <Taaus> Well, the <coord> popped from the stack is placed in a special variable called the "current coordinate".
2003-11-21.txt:02:43:26: <Taaus> The @+ operation doesn't affect the current coordinate, but it does push its argument onto the stack.
2003-11-21.txt:02:59:07: <Taaus> I guess you could implement a kind of truth values using empty/non-empty stacks...
2003-11-21.txt:02:59:23: <Taaus> It's possible to save stacks in variables, BTW.
2003-11-21.txt:03:24:37: <lament> is a stack just a type of coordinate? :)
2003-11-21.txt:03:41:04: <Taaus> Grr... Saving stacks in variables seems to be... Limited, somehow... It seems it has to take place directly after the stack has been initialised.
2003-12-29.txt:21:56:40: <lament> any time you need more stack for example
2003-12-29.txt:21:56:57: <lament> neither does c, if you consider the stack
2004-02-08.txt:05:01:54: <lament> brainfuck is often easy to write an interpreter for
2004-02-08.txt:05:02:25: <lament> or the universal register machine, which was used to prove turing-completeness of brainfuck itself
2004-02-08.txt:05:02:53: <Toreun> well, brainfuck is a UTM itself, essentially, isn't it?
2004-02-08.txt:05:04:29: <Toreun> well, a universal turing machine is a subset of brainfuck, isn't it?
2004-02-08.txt:05:04:44: <Toreun> because I thought that brainfuck was just meant to emulate a turing machine
2004-02-08.txt:05:08:02: <lament> Brainfuck is nothing like that.
2004-02-08.txt:05:09:29: <lament> TM is generally harder to implement in a given programming language than Brainfuck
2004-02-08.txt:05:10:13: <lament> the whole terminology is extremely fucked up.
2004-02-08.txt:05:19:02: <lament> depending on the language, either Brainfuck or SKI calculus will be easy to implement
2004-02-08.txt:05:20:55: <Toreun> it looks like brainfuck would be easier to implement because I don't really wanna think enough to implement this...
2004-02-08.txt:20:48:59: <Toreun> two dimensional, using a stack and a queue
2004-02-08.txt:20:51:24: <lament> Toreun: brainfuck is probably not the easiest way to prove turing-completeness of that
2004-02-08.txt:20:58:38: <fizzie> er, with a stack and a queue, wouldn't the "obvious" way to do that be to stack everything from the queue to the stack, and then enqueue them back in the queue? (hee, that sounds fun. stack to the stack and enqueue in a queue.)
2004-02-08.txt:21:13:14: <Toreun> at times like this, I am kinda regretting that it is this complicated... I am still not sure how I should store the instructions for brainfuck
2004-02-08.txt:21:13:49: <Toreun> I'm probably gonna end up just using source-editing, so I can have the stack for other things
2004-02-08.txt:21:14:17: <lament> perhaps writing a compiler from brainfuck to your language would be easier?
2004-02-08.txt:21:24:14: <fizzie> like that can't-remember-the-letter instruction in funge98 which pops the new delta vector from the stack.
2004-02-10.txt:23:12:09: <Toreun> my brainfuck interpreter or my esolang interpreter?
2004-02-11.txt:00:16:55: <mooz-> I made a multitasking befunge befunge interpreter, but it doesn't keep the processes' stacks separate yet, making it quite useless
2004-02-11.txt:00:18:11: <fizzie> my glfunge98 knows how to multithread with separate stacks (using the funge98 multithreading instructions) but it's otherwise ultra-mega-sucky.
2004-02-11.txt:00:27:56: <Toreun> and the void is a stack with a max size of two
2004-02-11.txt:02:25:19: <Toreun> grr!  my brainfuck interp has a really strange error!
2004-02-11.txt:22:57:34: <Toreun> well, for all those interested, http://www.toreun.org/eso.zip is the interpreter for my lang, and http://www.toreun.org/brainfuck is the directory with the source that proves its turing-completeness
2004-02-12.txt:00:51:06: <Toreun> http://www.toreun.org/eso.zip that's the interpreter and http://www.toreun.org/brainfuck
2004-02-13.txt:00:37:56: <calamari_> using c I could make a loop executing g() with void f() { g(); f() }, however, eventually the stack would overflow.  I wonder if there's a way to avoid that without using "if" "while", "for", etc.
2004-02-13.txt:00:55:54: <Toreun> and a sample (rather large) program is at http://www.toreun.org/brainfuck (it's the brainfuck interpreter for it)
2004-02-13.txt:01:01:59: <Toreun> I'm thinking 'quack' because it has a queue and a stack
2004-03-20.txt:10:57:00: <Infiel> this for things like malborge and brainfuck?
2004-04-16.txt:08:23:40: <dbc> Have you been following the friends-of-brainfuck list?
2004-04-16.txt:08:25:12: <dbc> Ah. Mailing list. https://ischtar.koeln.ccc.de/mailman/listinfo/friends-of-brainfuck
2004-04-16.txt:08:25:56: <lament> why have a whole list just about brainfuck?
2004-04-16.txt:08:26:23: <dbc> The commented version is at http://www.hevanet.com/cristofd/brainfuck/collatz.b
2004-04-25.txt:21:15:09: <heatsink> There seems to be a lot of brainfuck in the archives
2004-04-29.txt:03:30:51: <Toreun> I talked about it awhile back here... it's a two dimensional programming language with a stack and a queue
2004-04-29.txt:03:36:15: <Toreun> Brainfuck interpreter
2004-04-29.txt:06:08:52: <andreou> ah shit.
2004-04-30.txt:07:44:19: <lament> and "brainfork" instead of "brainfuck"
2004-04-30.txt:07:45:37: <heatsink> I saw this great mention of brainfuck in one of the class lecture notes
2004-04-30.txt:07:46:49: <lament> mostly brainfuck
2004-04-30.txt:07:47:05: <andreou> brainfuckoffkiddo
2004-04-30.txt:07:49:01: <heatsink> Well, brainfork is not actually known to be turing-complete; besides which brainfooey is not something any sane programmer would want to program in. For more info on brainfufu, look at the website (...). Of course, it's not actually called Brainflock, but we don't want to mention bad words and all that shit.
2004-04-30.txt:07:49:54: <lament> Larry Wall mentioned Brainfuck in one of his lectures on parrot.
2004-04-30.txt:07:50:07: <lament> There was a long list of languages on the slide, and the last was "Brainfuck"
2004-04-30.txt:07:50:45: <lament> "And I can't quite make out that last one... And even if I could, i wouldn't say it. Because there're kids present, and I wouldn't want to fuck with their brains"
2004-04-30.txt:08:34:23: <lament> holy shit
2004-05-01.txt:04:05:28: <andreou> shit, yeah.
2004-05-01.txt:08:51:27: <andreou> it's brainfuck with a few candy
2004-05-01.txt:08:52:31: <lament> Also, brainfuck has better syntax.
2004-05-01.txt:08:52:51: <lament> Brainfuck's syntax isn't obfuscated
2004-05-01.txt:08:53:31: <lament> But in ook, only syntax is needlessly obfuscated relative to Brainfuck
2004-05-04.txt:00:50:43: <andreou> by the way, the wikied code is stacked on my todo que (as #1), since i have to learn latex right now, i'll restart work on it tomorrow or the day after.
2004-05-04.txt:00:54:43: <Toreun> I know!  if you're using that argument, let's make the site in Brainfuck!
2004-05-04.txt:00:55:16: <Toreun> (I did see a webserver somewhere that had a brainfuck mod)
2004-05-04.txt:01:12:34: <Toreun> yeah, brainfuck
2004-05-04.txt:03:59:03: <heatsink> I like the brainfuck background, though
2004-05-15.txt:08:25:51: <mtve> btw, brainfuck is currently perlgolfed at http://kernelpanic.pl/perlgolf-view.mx?id=34
2004-05-25.txt:04:38:42: <Toreun> freakabcd: don't confuse programming brainfuck for mind-reading
2004-05-25.txt:04:41:07: <lament> And to program in Brainfuck, you have to be a mindwriter.
2004-05-27.txt:16:00:32: <fizzie> oh, and between '93 and '98 there was that funky funge with multithreading but a shared stack between all threads. (can't remember if it was '96 or '97)
2004-05-27.txt:16:06:04: <fizzie> they just push the corresponding number to stack.
2004-05-27.txt:16:06:30: <fizzie> there are no variables, just the stack. oh, and you can write/read to/from the playfield.
2004-05-27.txt:16:06:48: <fizzie> oh, right, funge98 also includes the "stack stack"
2004-05-27.txt:16:07:05: <fizzie> where instead of a single stack you actually have a stack of stacks, and you can manipulate those.
2004-05-27.txt:16:08:18: <fizzie> (if you're not familiar with forth, it just reaches into the stack and pulls out a number from an arbitrary depth.)
2004-05-27.txt:16:13:24: <fizzie> oh, and another difference: '93 had a defined 8-bit playfield and 32-bit stack. in funge98 the actual amount of bits is implementation-defined, but stack cells and playfield cells will be the same size.
2004-05-27.txt:16:14:27: <fizzie> but you can put anything from the stack to the playfield without having to worry about it being too big.
2004-05-27.txt:16:15:51: <Keymaker> it isn't pretty useful to have 32-bit stack and 8-bit playfield in 93'?
2004-05-27.txt:16:17:16: <fizzie> sorta-makes sense. the playfield is "text", composed of eight-bit octets, and the stack isn't 8-bit to allow you to calculate with larger numbers.
2004-05-27.txt:20:13:26: <Keymaker> i wonder if it's some brainfuck program that did those fractals?
2004-05-27.txt:23:03:11: <lament> oh, fuck logic then :)
2004-05-28.txt:20:51:07: <calamari_> also, I'm not sure how big a stack I'll need
2004-05-28.txt:22:05:37: <lament> is there only one optimizing brainfuck compiler?
2004-05-30.txt:20:04:38: <Keymaker> that'll have my (lame) brainfuck codes
2004-05-31.txt:21:59:52: <fizzie> book's by philip k. dick, who has written lots of excellent books, imho. not about robots though.
2004-06-04.txt:16:34:16: <Keymaker> hmmm, there's some brainfuck archive on that site *drool*
2004-06-04.txt:16:41:54: <Keymaker> oh wow! how this: http://esoteric.sange.fi/brainfuck/bf-source/prog/PI16.BF can be even possible? *confused*
2004-06-09.txt:22:44:21: <lament> Why is brainfuck so damn cool.
2004-06-09.txt:22:48:15: <lament> What brainfuck needs is a better macro system.
2004-06-09.txt:22:49:56: <lament> Are you subscribed to friends-of-brainfuck?
2004-06-09.txt:22:58:59: <deltab> 215725Z #esp <supybot> Title: BrainFuck.Net (at www.ecs.soton.ac.uk)
2004-06-09.txt:22:58:59: <deltab> 215733Z #esp <sbp> #  Does BrainFuck.Net use the controversial Microsoft Passport system for authentication?
2004-06-09.txt:22:58:59: <deltab> 215733Z #esp <sbp> No. The Brainfuck language has only 8 commands, and none of them are related to authentica
2004-06-10.txt:20:16:30: <lament> it's cool because at least Brainfuck does prescribe limited memory.
2004-06-10.txt:20:17:51: <lament> it would also require a fucking big computer
2004-06-10.txt:20:21:26: <lament> for brainfuck
2004-06-11.txt:00:27:16: <lament> Clearly people don't bother about optimizing their Brainfuck code at all!
2004-06-11.txt:04:17:32: <lament> basic->brainfuck
2004-06-11.txt:18:04:27: <lament> ideally, the optimizer should be written in brainfuck.
2004-06-11.txt:19:00:44: <lament> but really, it should be written in Brainfuck.
2004-06-11.txt:20:25:41: <lament> fuck.
2004-06-11.txt:20:34:06: <lament> FUCK
2004-06-11.txt:22:10:37: <lament> it's a brainfuck, not befunge, optimizer
2004-06-11.txt:22:22:15: <lament> wib.b (the brainfuck->c compiler) is 6288 instructions.
2004-06-12.txt:19:42:41: <lament> there's gotta be some content-inference scheme for brainfuck.
2004-06-12.txt:19:44:06: <lament> (not brainfuck->brainfuck optimizations, but brainfuck->C)
2004-06-15.txt:10:05:56: <calamari_> for those wondering.. I have bfasm working with simple programs.  Next I need to do arrays, then the stack, and finally put in text -> memory storage 
2004-06-20.txt:18:11:28: <calamari_> I haven't finished implementing the STK command (to set the stack size).. also need to understand/use a few of dbc's compare and divide/mod routines
2004-06-20.txt:18:12:12: <calamari_> stack (accessible via push & pop only)
2004-06-20.txt:18:15:36: <fizzie> sounds that any non-trivial C programs will compile to rather big blobs of brainfuck.
2004-06-24.txt:06:58:28: <lament> are you using an optimizing brainfuck compile?
2004-06-28.txt:02:46:29: <Toreun> I just wrote a brainfuck interpreter for it
2004-06-28.txt:02:47:22: <Toreun> see, I wrote my interpreter in PHP, an interpreted language.  so I had my brainfuck interpreter being interpreted by my language interpreter being interpreted by a php interpreter being interpreted by the processor
2004-06-28.txt:02:47:30: <WildHalcyon_> One option is just to push the function name onto the stack and have an 'execute' command
2004-06-28.txt:04:04:01: <Toreun> it has a stack and a queue
2004-06-28.txt:04:09:11: <WildHalcyon> so there's a stack and a queue?
2004-06-28.txt:04:11:39: <Toreun> there's my interpreter, and my brainfuck interpreter
2004-06-29.txt:18:03:00: <Toreun> just wondering, did anyone ever make brainfuck-native hardware? I read something about it awhile, and I'm just wondering if anything happened with it
2004-07-02.txt:06:38:15: <heatsink> Can a single datum (a cell, the stack contents, etc.) be arbitrarily big? Because then you could pack the lambda function into a single value, and then unpack it in-place... In fact, I've been wanting to do an esolang sort of like that
2004-07-02.txt:06:39:20: <WildHalcyon> Stack contents possibly, but an actual cell is limited to a 8-bit value
2004-07-05.txt:02:40:42: <lament> does linux run in brainfuck yet?
2004-07-06.txt:07:12:00: <WildHalcyon> like regular lambda functions in false - they're pushed onto the stack and executed like normal
2004-07-08.txt:17:04:39: <mtve> there was small tcpip stack in php and it shouldn't be more than 64k of bf-asm code i think.
2004-07-08.txt:17:05:40: <mtve> http://www.sics.se/~adam/phpstack/
2004-07-08.txt:17:10:52: <fizzie> there's all kinds of stuff like explicit congestion notification (RFC2884), syncookies, window scaling (RFC1323), Nagle's algorithm and loads of others if you want a funky tcp/ip stack.
2004-07-10.txt:04:58:56: <heatsink> brainfuck compiler collectoin?
2004-07-12.txt:21:02:01: <calamari_> is there an easy way to deal with that (I'm using something similar to recursive descent, using a stack rather than recursive calls)
2004-07-17.txt:22:13:29: <Lord_AnthraX> fuck the 8-ball
2004-08-05.txt:04:41:43: <JoeyP> WHAT THE FUCK REALTIME LOGGIN OMG LOL
2004-08-05.txt:04:46:05: <lament> What the fuck is esper.net?
2004-08-05.txt:04:49:41: <lament> this guy, he learned brainfuck, then his wife left him.
2004-08-05.txt:04:49:58: <lament> this other guy, he wrote a brainfuck interpreter, and then got raped by a bunch of thugs.
2004-08-05.txt:04:50:05: <LinkMasterSab> Shit*
2004-08-05.txt:04:50:10: <LinkMasterSab> I just wrote a brainfuck interpreter
2004-08-05.txt:04:50:27: <lament> another guy, he wrote a brainfuck compiler, and terrorists tortured him for a week before killing him
2004-08-05.txt:04:50:42: <lament> and i'd really rather not say what happened to the guy who invented brainfuck.
2004-08-05.txt:04:50:53: <LinkMasterSab> Brainfucked?
2004-08-05.txt:04:54:38: <LinkMasterSab> Anyone want my Brainfuck interpreter?
2004-08-05.txt:04:54:56: <lament> labeled "brainfuck interpreters in Python"
2004-08-05.txt:04:56:05: <JoeyP> Why make more brainfuck interpreters than needed?
2004-08-05.txt:04:56:25: <LinkMasterSab> Doublefuck is useless.
2004-08-05.txt:04:56:39: <LinkMasterSab> The two stacks don't interact.
2004-08-05.txt:04:57:10: <JoeyP> A heterosexual brainfuck interpreter?
2004-08-05.txt:04:57:29: <Taaus> That would be... Straightfuck.
2004-08-05.txt:04:57:41: <JoeyP> Tittiefuck
2004-08-05.txt:04:57:53: <lament> Cheesefuck (stay on topic dammit!)
2004-08-05.txt:04:58:02: <LinkMasterSab> Cheddarfuck :o
2004-08-05.txt:04:58:47: <JoeyP> It's superiour, since it already had the cheesefuck.
2004-08-05.txt:05:01:25: <JoeyP> shitty++
2004-08-05.txt:15:00:38: <JoeyP> I'll take that as a "NO BITCH, NOW FUCK OFF YOU FUCKING CUNT"
2004-08-12.txt:01:26:05: <JoeyP> oh shit
2004-08-12.txt:01:26:22: <JoeyP> i know, just a stack
2004-08-12.txt:01:26:36: <LinkMasterSab> Stacks are coo <23
2004-08-12.txt:01:27:41: <LinkMasterSab> pop(0) unless the callback stack isn't empty.
2004-08-12.txt:01:29:58: <LinkMasterSab> I tried to write a Brainfuck optimizer, didn't work too well.
2004-08-12.txt:01:30:01: <JoeyP> it will be shitty though
2004-08-12.txt:01:30:27: <LinkMasterSab> Optimizing with large numbers causes it to use stacks you might not want it to :/
2004-08-12.txt:01:30:51: <LinkMasterSab> Plus I couldn't figure out how the fuck to make it work with the stacks to being with.
2004-08-12.txt:01:39:26: <JoeyP> this is shitty
2004-09-13.txt:11:31:55: <ZeroOne> oh. ok. :/ here's my brainfuck-interpreter anyway: http://koti.mbnet.fi/~villes/php/bf.php (nested loops still not implemented).
2004-09-14.txt:21:27:53: <ZeroOne> something has to be thought for orphan letters which probably will appear. maybe if a letter set doesn't form an instruction, it could be pushed to stack
2004-09-14.txt:21:36:51: <fizzie> was going to write a befunge variant with "define", "call" and "return" instructions. 'define' would take an (x,y) pair that defines the start of an function and a small integer 'n' which would be the "name", 'call' would pop n and go to the function, but push the return address to stack, and 'return' would pop the return address off the stack and go back.
2004-09-14.txt:21:37:10: <fizzie> not sure if I wanted a separate "execution stack" or to use the normal stack for it.
2004-09-14.txt:21:38:03: <lindi-> separate stack would be too easy
2004-09-14.txt:21:38:19: <fizzie> yes, but if I use the normal stack then delivering parameters to functions will be hard.
2004-09-17.txt:18:49:33: <Keymaker> ZeroOne: interesting php brainfuck interpreter coming up there
2004-09-18.txt:01:00:27: <lament> of course there already exists a php brainfuck interpreter
2004-09-22.txt:19:18:29: <Keymaker> ZeroOne: in my previous message i had a small brainfuck code ',[[.>]<]'
2004-10-05.txt:22:23:01: <ZeroOne> Hipo: like Brainfuck, Befunge, Whitespace, INTERCAL, Unlambda, ...
2004-10-05.txt:22:23:30: <Hipo> A bit brainfuck.
2004-10-31.txt:18:57:53: <Keymaker> one thing in a brainfuck program i was writing..
2004-11-07.txt:03:34:38: <heatsink> A while ago, someone wrote a C -> brainfuck compiler
2004-11-07.txt:03:35:33: <slava> i'm working on stack effect inference for postfix languages
2004-11-07.txt:03:36:21: <slava> eg, the stack effect of 2 2 + is [ 0 | 1 ] because it takes no values from the stack, but leaves one
2004-11-07.txt:03:36:38: <slava> the stack effect of dup * is [ 1 | 1 ], because it takes one value, duplicates it, multiplies the two duplicates, to yield one value
2004-11-07.txt:03:37:07: <heatsink> Doesn't 2 2 + take two values from the stack and then add one?
2004-11-07.txt:03:37:48: <heatsink> so what is the stack effect of printf?
2004-11-07.txt:03:39:17: <slava> so the stack effect of 2 2 + is [ 0 | 1 ] * [ 0 | 1 ] * [ 2 | 1 ]
2004-11-07.txt:03:40:27: <jDoctor> it should lead to computer-generated stack effects, right?
2004-11-07.txt:03:41:29: <heatsink> do both branches of an if-then-else have to have the same stack effect to be legal?
2004-11-07.txt:03:42:44: <slava> since after the ifte, the stack height is constant, sonce the two branches are balanced
2004-11-07.txt:03:43:54: <slava> this is valid, since i have proofs that balanced sets of stack effects behave just like the maximimal element under pairwise composition
2004-11-07.txt:03:44:26: <slava> words that take variable numbers of arguments off the stack?
2004-11-07.txt:03:51:40: <slava> yes, but I don't infer stack effects of code involving them.
2004-12-01.txt:17:38:03: <Keymaker> c-code to brainfuck?
2004-12-06.txt:22:27:01: <ZeroOne> hey, I implemented nested loops to my online PHP-Brainfuck Interpreter: http://koti.mbnet.fi/villes/php/bf.php
2004-12-06.txt:22:27:17: <ZeroOne> a brainfuck interpreted made with php, that is
2004-12-10.txt:18:03:23: <Keymaker> i made a program in brainfuck
2004-12-23.txt:08:41:11: <nooga> i know only brainfuck
2004-12-24.txt:22:04:19: <lament> Maybe you should speak of brainfuck.
2004-12-26.txt:03:38:42: <lament> befunge and brainfuck are both great.
2004-12-26.txt:12:37:42: <Keymaker> yeah. i just tought it'd be nice to know the 'official', i'd like to make on in brainfuck
2004-12-26.txt:12:52:04: <nooga_> code space, output window and stack listener :)
2004-12-26.txt:13:55:36: <nooga_> because i dont pop from the stack when | or _ are noticed
2004-12-26.txt:14:00:37: <ZeroOne> erm, no. I haven't done that much befunge. I wrote a brainfuck interpreter in PHP, though.
2004-12-26.txt:14:07:10: <nooga_> but im polluted with befunge and brainfuck
2004-12-26.txt:14:11:29: <nooga_> it would be funny to build electronic brainfuck
2004-12-26.txt:14:15:27: <nooga_> i will make brainfuck processor
2004-12-26.txt:21:54:20: <lament> basically, look at Brainfuck, Befunge, Lazy K
2004-12-26.txt:22:01:02: <nooga> 5{--} = +++++ in brainfuck; 2{5{--}.} = +++++.+++++. 
2004-12-26.txt:22:05:38: <lament> anything with a brainfuck-like memory model is likely to be useless
2004-12-26.txt:22:35:15: <nooga> brainfuck based
2004-12-26.txt:23:01:48: <nooga> wanna see my useless version of brainfuck? :P
2004-12-26.txt:23:02:56: <nooga> +++>++++++++++++<[>.<-] in brainfuck is equal to:
2004-12-26.txt:23:14:58: <Keymaker> here's sample of one (similar to brainfuck) i've been planning    .;;;; .:; :; .;;;; ,:; ,.; ,.:;
2004-12-26.txt:23:16:15: <Keymaker> basically, this is brainfuck, but with some extra instructions and instructions represented non-easier way
2004-12-27.txt:18:41:38: <Keymaker> that brainfuck quine
2004-12-27.txt:18:54:27: <ZeroOne> like www.keymakersbrainfuck.tk or keymakerbf.cjb.net or something like that
2004-12-27.txt:18:56:31: <Keymaker> or not necessarily entirely for brainfuck, but for some esoteric programming language projects
2004-12-27.txt:19:02:16: <ZeroOne> just for the fun of it, I just reserved the address http://brainfuck.tk/ :)
2004-12-28.txt:19:16:40: <mtve> http://puzzlet.org/puzzlet/Funge~PuzzletChung/Brainfuck
2005-01-15.txt:23:43:59: <Keymaker> that picture that has inside it some brainfuck stuff seems interesting.. anyways; good night everyone, i'll go to sleep. :)
2005-01-16.txt:12:07:01: <mtve> _ operator pops the stack
2005-01-16.txt:12:12:03: <Keymaker> this seems to be pretty good language :) (though, can't beat brainfuck, naturally!)
2005-01-16.txt:12:15:59: <Keymaker> will the first in stack be 0 or the one that is followed by "
2005-01-16.txt:12:16:19: <Keymaker> "hi"   would there be on stack  0 h i
2005-01-16.txt:12:17:34: <mtve> and most of implementations pop zero from empty stack.
[too many lines; stopping]