Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #154493
| From | "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.folklore.computers |
| Subject | Re: "Brainfuck"? |
| Date | 2015-11-14 20:26 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <n2858v$e2u$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <n225lv$1q2$1@dont-email.me> |
"gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote in message news:n225lv$1q2$1@dont-email.me... > Whereas there have been hardware implementations of the low-level > primitves > of FORTH, I wonder if any have been done for the "Brainfuck" language, > which would seem to be a much simpler exercise? It was actually a serious question ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainfuck
Back to alt.folklore.computers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
"Brainfuck"? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-12 13:56 +0000
Re: "Brainfuck"? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-14 20:26 +0000
Re: "Brainfuck"? Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-14 21:08 +0000
Re: "Brainfuck"? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-11-14 23:12 +0000
Re: "Brainfuck"? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-15 05:57 +0000
Re: "Brainfuck"? Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-15 10:30 +0000
csiph-web