Re: Re: Brainfuck Interpreter

I'm gonna take that stuff into consideration when implement .02 which will hopefully have load of cool features which i was thinking about when i wrote the code, but didn't implement in v.01...

i'll add in all the restraints on the language too like the size of the buffer, and the single byte per value...

my intention for "," as input was to have <> trap whatever the user input but it will only push the first character of the string inputted onto the stack... but i'll make it trap only 1 character in the future..

Thanks very much for your help o(o_o)o

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
i would slit my wrists for you

Comment on Re: Re: Brainfuck Interpreter

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Brainfuck Interpreter by o(o_o)o (Scribe) on Mar 13, 2002 at 16:15 UTC
another thing ;)... i know most people think that it should maybe be written obfu'd, but that wasn't really my way of thinking... i set out to write an interpreter which will be easy to understand so that modifications could easily be made to 1)make the code better, 2)add extra features and make extra commands(ie.another language), 3)allow easy integration of more functions of the interpreter such as debugging and stepover. but i see where u lot are all coming from ;) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ i would slit my wrists for you	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re: Re: Re: Brainfuck Interpreter
by o(o_o)o (Scribe) on Mar 13, 2002 at 16:15 UTC

another thing ;)... i know most people think that it should maybe be written obfu'd, but that wasn't really my way of thinking... i set out to write an interpreter which will be easy to understand so that modifications could easily be made to 1)make the code better, 2)add extra features and make extra commands(ie.another language), 3)allow easy integration of more functions of the interpreter such as debugging and stepover. but i see where u lot are all coming from ;)

[reply]