1
\$\begingroup\$

Write a program that outputs as many characters as possible, with two conditions:

  • The program must be 256 bytes or shorter
  • The program must almost surely eventually halt. In other words, the only thing not permitted in response to this question is an infinite loop.

For the purposes of this problem, any built-in psudo-random number generators will be treated as though they actually produce true random numbers. Even if it takes a really long time (years, centuries, or millennia) to compile, the program MUST BE a valid program in your language (and it must compile in a finite amount of time).

The program which produces the longest textual output before halting wins!!! (This means you must provide an approximate number of the expected length of output).

A note on arbitrary-precision arithmatic: No use of built-in arbitrary precision arithmetic capabilities.

\$\endgroup\$

closed as off-topic by Luis Mendo, Oliver Ni, nimi, acrolith, Blue Nov 20 '16 at 22:28

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "Questions without an objective primary winning criterion are off-topic, as they make it impossible to indisputably decide which entry should win." – Luis Mendo, Oliver Ni, nimi, acrolith, Blue
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ If I don't limit the length of the code, someone's going to just give a giant tower of for-loops inside for-loops as they're response. \$\endgroup\$ – J. Antonio Perez Nov 20 '16 at 20:42
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ It's like a busy-beaver number with a turing machine. You can make arbitrarily complex turing machines to run for arbitrarily long amounts of time, but busy-beaver numbers are only interesting if you put a limit on the number of symbols and the number of states. \$\endgroup\$ – J. Antonio Perez Nov 20 '16 at 20:45
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ I don't see how this is off-topic. It definitely has an objective primary winning criterion (namely, most characters output). This isn't to say that this wouldn't be a duplicate of Largest Number Printable. \$\endgroup\$ – LegionMammal978 Nov 20 '16 at 23:07
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ It's not a duplicate. The victory condition also appears to be objective (although some of the resulting numbers may be so high that they're hard to compare). I'd recommend you make some sort of statement about whether the program has to run on a physical computer (which would be subject to things like word size restrictions and the like) or not; it makes a huge amount of difference here! (256 bytes is probably enough to write a program that uses the entirety of the computer's memory as a counter, and it's mathematically impossible to produce more output than that without an infinite loop.) \$\endgroup\$ – user62131 Nov 21 '16 at 0:04
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ The problem with this challenge is that if you allow randomness, it becomes difficult to compare two entries where the expected number of printed characters is infinite. \$\endgroup\$ – Zgarb Nov 29 '16 at 10:29