Looks like I need to implement more security and error handling before I integrate the bλcode interpreter into a BBS.
Anyone has any suggestions for solving the halting problem?
>>4
I'd rather bend over and have MILKRIBS violate me.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-18 13:19
>>4
But well, calling functions inside funtions is necessary if I want to enable something like [define=expert][b][i][o][u]$_[/u][/o][/i][/b][/define]
Since all looping would have to be done through recursion, I'll probably just disallow calling functions which weren't declared beforehand, so that both [define=p][p/][/define] and [define=a][b/][/define][define=b][a/][/define] will fail.
Can you guys think of any scenarios where recursion/looping would be necessary?
>>1
It's incredibly easy. Since these are going to be posted on a bbs, just have a timeout of like 1 second. But still no loop constructs, just recursion.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-18 23:09
But what if I want to build enterprise bbcode applications? I demand features facilitating bbcode reuse
>>19
If we give you that then what next? Object-Oriented BBCode? The ability to seamlessly integrate with Enterprise Databases? XML libraries? JBBCode? No sir, you will just have to make do with regular BBCode and take your Enterprise Applications elsewhere.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-19 12:34
>>17
this is some stupid shit language with bbcode syntax, NOT A VALID BBCODE
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-19 14:32
>>21
Please present some actual arguments instead of just saying it isn't BBCode. I am open to new ideas.
>>22
[LIST]
[*]BBCode does not have DEFINE
[*]BBCode does not have ANY OF YOUR STUPID LISP/HASKELL SHIT
[*]Just taking any old language and giving it BBCode syntax DOES NOT MAKE IT A BBCODE!!
[/LIST]
Please try looking at the BBCode help tutorials on online web forums!!! If you want to learn the LANGUAGE ITSSELF INSTEAD OF JUST BLUBBLING YOUR SCHEME CRAP EVERYWERE
>>28
Is it going to be a real implementation or just a bunch of random non-standard BBCode tags you post that don't actually do anything? Given this is /prog/, I'm inclined to think the latter.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-19 18:58
>>29
What do you mean by real implementation?
If I'll ever get to implementing my own BBS then I plan on using an extended BBCode instruction set, allowing some more advanced constructs.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-19 19:07
I think I might write a x86 assembler that uses bbcode-style syntax. It would just be a front for nasm.
>>27
You shitting dick tits I how dare you fukcking hello that is prenky. Listen to me dood I have twelf thing say to do but you. ONE BBCODE IS NOT MERCLY A WAY OF EXPRESSION, IT IS AN INVDIVVUAL AND VALID FORM OF ART ON ITS OWN. YOUR IT JUST LISP WITH BBCODE SYNTAX.