blob: a5ce21a9153b76d2ede71ce3e1f684d64e13f4ed (
plain) (
blame)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
|
# Birb
| bird | term | birb | bird |
|:-----|:--------------------------|:------------|------------------|
| πͺΆ | c `[[[2 0 1]]]` | cardinal | feather |
| π¦ | i `[0]` | idiot | bird |
| ποΈ | d `[[[[3 2 (1 0)]]]]` | dove | dove |
| π€ | t `[[0 (1 1 0)]]` | turing | baby chick |
| π₯ | qβββ `[[[0 (1 2)]]]` | quacky | front baby chick |
| π£ | Ξ© `[0 0] [0 0]` | omega | hatching chick |
| π¦ | o `[[0 (1 0)]]` | owl | owl |
| π | m `[0 0]` | mockingbird | chicken |
| π¦ | k `[[1]]` | kestrel | duck |
| 𦀠| t `[[0 1]]` | thrush | dodo |
| 𦩠| y `[[1 (0 0)] [1 (0 0)]]` | sage | flamingo |
| π¦’ | s `[[[2 0 (1 0)]]]` | starling | swan |
| πͺ½ | Ο `[[[[3 (2 0) (1 0)]]]]` | phoenix | wing |
| π¦ | w `[[1 0 0]]` | warbler | turkey |
| π | f `[[[0 1 2]]]` | finch | rooster |
| π¦ | q `[[[1 (2 0)]]]` | queer | peacock |
| π¦ | b `[[[2 (1 0)]]]` | bluebird | parrot |
| π¦
| e `[[[[[4 3 (2 1 0)]]]]]` | eagle | eagle |
| π§ | ΞΉ `[0 s k]` | iota | penguin |
The mappings and their paired reduction are *not* biologically accurate!
Unfortunately the Unicode team does not have enough bird emojis. Create
a PR to improve biological accuracy.
# Syntax
- `[birb]+`: Birb (left-associative)
- everything else: Comment
# Examples
## Biology
- ππ $\rightsquigarrow$ π£
- πͺΆπ¦ $\rightsquigarrow$ π¦
- π¦’π¦ $\rightsquigarrow$ π¦
- π¦’π¦π¦ $\rightsquigarrow$ π¦
- π¦’π¦π¦ $\rightsquigarrow$ π
- π¦π€ $\rightsquigarrow$ π₯
- π¦π¦ $\rightsquigarrow$ ποΈ
## Arithmetic
## Busy ~~beavers~~ birbs
# Turing-completeness
The language is probably Turing complete. If the language supported
left- *and* right-associativity, π§ would be enough to prove its
completeness.
|