Timeline for Write an interpreter for my esoteric language Jumper
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
45 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 5, 2020 at 6:30 | answer | added | Xcali | timeline score: 0 | |
| Feb 5, 2020 at 0:50 | comment | added | S.S. Anne | How is "Aborted" or "Aborted (core dumped)"? | |
| Sep 19, 2014 at 2:29 | answer | added | Jerry Jeremiah | timeline score: 2 | |
| Aug 14, 2014 at 22:36 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackCodeGolf/status/500048280597045248 | ||
| Aug 1, 2014 at 3:15 | comment | added | Scott Leadley | @user2992539 Should the interpreter throw an error as soon as the RAM pointer goes negative (a underflow/wrap-around condition with real hardware), or only when a =+-?, i.e. memory load/store operation, occurs? Assumption, I've implemented it as throwing an error as soon as the RAM pointer goes negative. See the test suite attached to my solution for more details. | |
| Aug 1, 2014 at 2:55 | comment | added | Scott Leadley | Upon reflection, Jumper 2.0 with more features seems like a good idea. Incrementally connecting the mathematical model to more realistic systems has a lot of pedagogical value. | |
| Jul 31, 2014 at 8:29 | comment | added | Somnium |
@ScottLeadley end-of-program+1 I thought to be an error. If # and :1 you mean as complete program, then you are right.
|
|
| Jul 31, 2014 at 2:07 | comment | added | Scott Leadley | @user2992539 As further exploration of your answer to Q1, I believe you're saying that "#" exits successfully and ":1" throws an error. | |
| Jul 31, 2014 at 2:03 | comment | added | Scott Leadley | Jumper is an elegantly minimal toy. A more modern Turing machine. Although :* and #* would give Jumper a useful subroutine mechanism and an accumulator would be nice, I think adding more to Jumper would detract from it's value as a teaching tool. If you're looking for realism, there are plenty of PDP-8, 4040, 6502, 680x and 808x emulators available to play with. | |
| Jul 31, 2014 at 0:11 | comment | added | aschepler |
Feature request for Jumper 2.0: The token * may be used as an argument (in place of a number). The contents of the current cell are used as the argument value.
|
|
| Jul 30, 2014 at 23:48 | comment | added | Scott Leadley | @user2992539 After rereading your answer to Q1, I believe you're saying the interpreter should display "Error" unless a program falls off the end by advancing the program counter by 1. Jumping to the same address, end-of-program+1, is an error. Is this correct? If so, I'm going to need to make some changes. | |
| Jul 30, 2014 at 23:14 | answer | added | Matt Noonan | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jul 28, 2014 at 22:16 | answer | added | Fors | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 28, 2014 at 17:23 | comment | added | Scott Leadley | The 2nd chunk of code in my submission is a test harness. Most submissions (except mine, of course :-) fail. If you care to point out blatantly wrong test results {comment at my post so we don't clutter the OP comment thread}, I'll fix them if I have time. Don't pester me over the newline vs. no-newline suffixing. You can change that yourself. | |
| Jul 28, 2014 at 16:25 | comment | added | Fors | It is definitely more difficult to write something useful in Jumper than in Brainfuck. A most devious language. | |
| Jul 28, 2014 at 13:43 | answer | added | markusw | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jul 28, 2014 at 7:00 | comment | added | Somnium |
@ScottLeadley Q1 - I mean successfully ends executing - after last command is executed without error. If : command send pointer out of range - it is error. Q2 - it's not necessary, but if it doesn't cost you bytes it's preferable.
|
|
| Jul 28, 2014 at 2:20 | answer | added | Scott Leadley | timeline score: 6 | |
| Jul 28, 2014 at 2:05 | comment | added | Scott Leadley | Q 1 - What constitutes "program ends executing"? Assumption 1 - Terminate any time the program counter goes out of range. Q 2 - Should post-termination printing add a newline? Assuption 2 - No. | |
| Jul 27, 2014 at 19:32 | comment | added | Martin Ender | You should leave comments on the answers that don't comply with your changed spec regarding invalid syntax (for instance, that'll cost my submission at least 40 characters, I think) | |
| Jul 27, 2014 at 19:28 | history | edited | Somnium | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 167 characters in body
|
| Jul 27, 2014 at 19:18 | history | edited | Somnium | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 242 characters in body
|
| Jul 26, 2014 at 22:25 | comment | added | soktinpk | If the input is invalid syntax, what should happen? | |
| Jul 26, 2014 at 21:16 | answer | added | Martin Ender | timeline score: 7 | |
| Jul 26, 2014 at 20:49 | comment | added | Martin Ender | Also, what about invalid arguments for the go-to command? And can the program crash on any invalid syntax? And could you please add test cases which use the remaining commands as well (and also one where the RAM size increases)? | |
| Jul 26, 2014 at 19:38 | answer | added | soktinpk | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jul 26, 2014 at 13:16 | comment | added | Martin Ender | Could you specify the exact error message for negative indices? I think the difference between the two currently leading answers is less than the difference in their error messages, so I think it would be fairer if this was precisely specified. | |
| Jul 26, 2014 at 12:55 | comment | added | seequ | @user2992539 Darn, that breaks my interpreter. I thought comments would count as whitespace. Will fix later. | |
| Jul 26, 2014 at 11:44 | answer | added | tomsmeding | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 25, 2014 at 22:32 | comment | added | Somnium | @Oberon comments may be placed anywhere. | |
| Jul 25, 2014 at 22:19 | comment | added | Oberon | May comments be placed between the operator and its argument? | |
| Jul 25, 2014 at 20:26 | comment | added | seequ | Simple language, thus fun challenge. Thanks! | |
| Jul 25, 2014 at 20:18 | answer | added | seequ | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 25, 2014 at 8:48 | comment | added | Somnium | @arshajii Some test programs added. Will be more. It's a bit hard to think in Jumper but fun) | |
| Jul 25, 2014 at 8:46 | history | edited | Somnium | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 76 characters in body
|
| Jul 25, 2014 at 8:36 | history | edited | Somnium | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 58 characters in body
|
| Jul 25, 2014 at 8:13 | history | edited | Somnium | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 58 characters in body
|
| Jul 25, 2014 at 8:05 | history | edited | Somnium | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 143 characters in body
|
| Jul 24, 2014 at 18:08 | answer | added | arshajii | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jul 24, 2014 at 17:47 | comment | added | arshajii | Could you give us some sample programs and their outputs? | |
| Jul 24, 2014 at 17:24 | comment | added | Somnium | Yes, we shouldn't. That is done to not to clear whole used memory, but only copy output to beginning. | |
| Jul 24, 2014 at 17:15 | comment | added | ProgramFOX | "to first zero byte excluding" So if there still come other bytes after the first zero byte, we shouldn't output them? | |
| Jul 24, 2014 at 16:55 | comment | added | Somnium | I will write some test programs in Jumper after some time and own interpreter. | |
| Jul 24, 2014 at 16:48 | history | edited | Somnium | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Jul 24, 2014 at 16:34 | history | asked | Somnium | CC BY-SA 3.0 |