PATH and 10 Print Interpretation

Revision as of 12:36, 29 June 2010 (view source)

JeremyDouglass (Talk | contribs)

(Michael reimplemented 10 print in PATH)

← Older edit

Revision as of 12:37, 29 June 2010 (view source)

JeremyDouglass (Talk | contribs)

(→10 Print reimplemented in PATH)

Newer edit →

Line 52:

...I have perversely implemented 10 print in path. I've attached the path source in both uncommented and commented form. There's no cool ascii art double coding in my program - it's unvarnished path code. The file maze.txt contains generated output. Some observations:

−

1) In the same way that Ian argued 10 print is more native in basic than in assembly, I think I've conclusively shown it is also not a native path program.

+

# In the same way that Ian argued 10 print is more native in basic than in assembly, I think I've conclusively shown it is also not a native path program.

−

+

# My path program generates labyrinths by endlessly walking a labyrinth (perhaps countering the first point).

−

2) My path program generates labyrinths by endlessly walking a labyrinth (perhaps countering the first point).

+

# Looking at 10 print in 6502 assembly still masks the complexity of 10 print, particularly the random number generator - compare the 5 instruction 6502 implementation of the 8 bit LFSR with the path implementation. Working in a turing minimalist language with unary arithmetic highlights the tower of abstraction on top of which a von Neumann architecture sits.

−

+

# Staring at the LFSR code in path (and even assembly) fills me with wonder as to how that chunk of code successfully stands in for "making an aesthetic decision."

−

3) Looking at 10 print in 6502 assembly still masks the complexity of 10 print, particularly the random number generator - compare the 5 instruction 6502 implementation of the 8 bit LFSR with the path implementation. Working in a turing minimalist language with unary arithmetic highlights the tower of abstraction on top of which a von Neumann architecture sits.

−

4) Staring at the LFSR code in path (and even assembly) fills me with wonder as to how that chunk of code successfully stands in for "making an aesthetic decision."

</blockquote>

PATH and 10 Print Interpretation

From Maze

Revision as of 12:37, 29 June 2010

Views

Personal tools

Navigation

Search

Toolbox

@@ Line 52: / Line 52: @@
 ...I have perversely implemented 10  print in path. I've attached the path source in both uncommented and commented form. There's no cool ascii art double coding in my program - it's unvarnished path code. The file maze.txt contains generated output. Some observations:
-) In the same way that Ian argued 10 print is more native in basic than in assembly, I think I've conclusively shown it is also not a native path program.
+# In the same way that Ian argued 10 print is more native in basic than in assembly, I think I've conclusively shown it is also not a native path program.
+# My path program generates labyrinths by endlessly walking a labyrinth (perhaps countering the first point).
-) My path program generates labyrinths by endlessly walking a labyrinth (perhaps countering the first point).
+# Looking at 10 print in 6502 assembly still masks the complexity of 10 print, particularly the random number generator - compare the 5 instruction 6502 implementation of the 8 bit LFSR with the path implementation. Working in a turing minimalist language with unary arithmetic highlights the tower of abstraction on top of which a von Neumann architecture sits.
+# Staring at the LFSR code in path (and even assembly) fills me with wonder as to how that chunk of code successfully stands in for "making an aesthetic decision."
-) Looking at 10 print in 6502 assembly still masks the complexity of 10 print, particularly the random number generator - compare the 5 instruction 6502 implementation of the 8 bit LFSR with the path implementation. Working in a turing minimalist language with unary arithmetic highlights the tower of abstraction on top of which a von Neumann architecture sits.
-) Staring at the LFSR code in path (and even assembly) fills me with wonder as to how that chunk of code successfully stands in for "making an aesthetic decision."
 </blockquote>