# Radiation hardened cyclic quine polyglot

## Challenge

Write two programs that:

• run in two different programming languages.
• These may not be two versions of one language.
• when one program is run, it outputs the second program, and vice versa.
• The two programs must be different (no polyglots).

Here's the catch though:

• The programs must be radiation hardened.
• This means that when any set of $$\n\$$ (defined below) characters is removed from either of the two programs, their functionality is unaffected.
• $$\n\$$ is defined as the number of characters that may be omitted with your program's functionality unaffected.
• $$\n\$$ must be at least $$\1\$$.

## Rules

• Standard loopholes are disallowed.
• Your programs must be proper cyclic quines. They may not read their own source code.
• Scoring is performed as follows:
• Your score is $$\\frac{S_1+S_2}n\$$
• where $$\S_1\$$ and $$\S_2\$$ are the size of your first and second programs respectively…
• and $$\n\$$ is as defined above.
• This is a , lowest score wins.

## Reward

As this challenge is difficult to answer, I will be giving a bounty to the first person to answer.

• Must the programs be proper quines?
– user45941
May 30, 2017 at 23:49
• @Mego Whoops - forgot to mention that. Yes. May 30, 2017 at 23:51
• Well, "proper quine" isn't the right term since they're not quines, but it seems you understood what I meant.
– user45941
May 30, 2017 at 23:53
• Personally, I don't think this really adds much to the semiquine and radiation-hardening quine challenges we've already had; both categories have already been thrown together in so many combinations that it's extremely hard to come up with a truly original combination. May 31, 2017 at 1:55
• You should probably add some kind of reward for answering this. I feel like it's too extremely difficult for many people to want to try. I saw this had no answers and I was thinking "ooh a quine challenge, I love those!" but then I read ALL THE RULES and it completely deterred me. May 31, 2017 at 18:01

# Gol><> and ><>, (117 bytes + 117 bytes)/1 = 234

### Gol><>

\\<<'3d*}}}}~}:r0<}!o::! ?>~~a<o>Hr~Kl a}}:?%2l}}}ss2"<<\\
\\<<'3d*}}}}~}:r0<}!o::! ?>~~a<o>Hr~Kl a}}:?%2l}}}ss2"<<\\


Try it online!

### ><>

\\<<"2ss}}}l2%?:}}a lK~rH>o<a~~>? !::o!}<0r:}~}}}}*d3'<<\\
\\<<"2ss}}}l2%?:}}a lK~rH>o<a~~>? !::o!}<0r:}~}}}}*d3'<<\\


Try it online!

Verification!

These two programs are the same, just reversed. They both follow the same general code structure.

### Explanation (Gol><> on top, ><> on the bottom)

\\<<                           <<\\  Transition to the copy of the code that is not radiated
\\<<                           <<\\

"    Wrapping string literal over the rest of the code
'

ss2     Push the string character
*3d

}}}        Rotate the "<<\" to the correct end of the stack
}}}

}}:?%2l           Use the extra \ to replace a possible irradiated copy
}~}:

~     lK                    Duplicate the code
~~>? !::o!}<0r             Print a copy of the code in reverse

a                  Push a newline
a
Hr                             Reverse, print the rest of stack and terminate
>o<                            Print the rest of the stack and terminate