Re: Bug#354831: ITP: bfc -- Brainfuck compiler
On 3/1/06, Steve Greenland <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 01-Mar-06, 13:05 (CST), Tim Olsen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > It's "An Eight-Instruction Turing-Complete Programming Language."
> Yeah, I know. That doesn't make it "useful".
"Useful" is a matter of opinion. A programming language with the
minimum number of instructions necessary to be turing-complete and
have I/O may be more than a toy for some people. Who knows, maybe you
could prove theoretical stuff more easily with it.
> And given the reaction to porn-get and bitchx and
> whatever-the-stripping-cpu-monitor-was-called , I tend to assume that
> the true intent of such an ITP is to instigate yet another 500 post
> flame war between the "but what about the children" crew and the "you
> can't censor me!" crew. It's all just so damn tiresome.
I think we can give the packager the benefit of the doubt given that
he maintains an archive of brainf*ck tools.
>  Not that I think "useful" is a necessary requirement, and brainfuck
> is a neat toy. I personally have no objection to the ITP.
>  Countering that is that the package is named "bfc" rather than
> "brainfuck", so maybe I'm being unfair, and it's not a deliberate
> attempt to rile people.
> Steve Greenland
> The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
> system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
> world. -- seen on the net
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com