Most active commenters
  • shakna(5)
  • b_e_n_t_o_n(3)

←back to thread

176 points sirbread | 11 comments | | HN request time: 0.437s | source | bottom

i made an esoteric programming language which i call spellscript. every program is a "spell" written in a "grimoire," and you have to use keywords like summon, enchant, inscribe, and conjure.

it's literally read like a spellbook because the syntax consists of all natural language, and newlines are optional. your code can now be an essay, like everybody wants!

for example, if you want to print something, you'd write: `begin the grimoire. inscribe whispers of "hello, world!". close the grimoire.`

it has variables, dynamic typing, arrays, functions, conditionals, loops, string manipulation, array manipulation, type conversion, and user input, among other (listed in the docs!)

but why? i wanted to see how far you could push natural language syntax while still being parseable. most esolangs are intentionally obtuse (BF, Malbolge), but i wanted something that's weird but readable, like you're reading instructions from a spellbook, which makes it incredibly easy to read and understand. like an anti-esolang? hmm...

github: https://github.com/sirbread/spellscript

docs: https://github.com/sirbread/spellscript/blob/main/resources/...

Show context
egypturnash ◴[] No.45558620[source]
This reads like a vague idea of a spellbook from someone who has never even looked at a caricature of a grimoire, let alone a real one.

I think you should read some actual grimoires before developing this further. I suggest the Picatrix or the PGM as starting points. Maybe a copy of 777 as well.

replies(6): >>45560329 #>>45560381 #>>45560886 #>>45561141 #>>45561358 #>>45561740 #
1. b_e_n_t_o_n ◴[] No.45561358[source]
Absolutely incredible to see a snarky nit on a project like this. Hackernews never fails haha.
replies(2): >>45561649 #>>45561773 #
2. shakna ◴[] No.45561649[source]
The project is a carricature of real world religions that are still active today.

Where is the surprise that it raises ire?

replies(2): >>45561787 #>>45611072 #
3. dang ◴[] No.45561773[source]
I appreciate your intention, of course, but please don't respond by breaking the site guidelines yourself. It only makes things worse.

Besides "Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community." (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html), this guideline is relevant:

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

I doubt that egypturnash intended a "snarky nit". More likely this is someone who's passionate about the underlying topic (grimoires!), naturally got excited when seeing the OP, and then was disappointed when it didn't go as deep as someone with their level of knowledge would expect.

It's bad, of course, to express that by putting down the OP or their work; much better to respond by sharing some of what one knows, as I explained at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45561740.

4. b_e_n_t_o_n ◴[] No.45561787[source]
Is it? I figured it was halloween themed.
replies(1): >>45563733 #
5. shakna ◴[] No.45563733{3}[source]
Halloween is connected to the religious festivals, All Hallow's Eve and Día de Muertos. Whilst commercialism may have overtaken the holiday today, it is still a deeply sacred event to some, and can cause offense when it isn't treated that way.

In the same way some Christians are offended by the commercialisation of Easter and Christmas.

replies(1): >>45564762 #
6. herewulf ◴[] No.45564762{4}[source]
"Real world religions" would be better served by concerning themselves with more productive pursuits than getting worked up over every little perceived offense. Then there would be no ire at all!
replies(1): >>45565019 #
7. shakna ◴[] No.45565019{5}[source]
You appear to have taken offence, at people taking offence. Which points towards beliefs you may hold.

Yes, there is balance to be found. But if people point out you've made fun of their beliefs, then adapt. No need to act out. We all have beliefs, whether or not that is an organised belief. Ideaology is everywhere in everything.

People are still people. Communicate and the irritation can fade.

replies(1): >>45565884 #
8. b_e_n_t_o_n ◴[] No.45565884{6}[source]
You appear to have taken offence, at people taking offence, to people taking offence!
replies(1): >>45566059 #
9. shakna ◴[] No.45566059{7}[source]
Did you want to try the communication part of the suggestion?
10. egypturnash ◴[] No.45611072[source]
Magic != Religion.

Magic can certainly interact with things commonly seen as religion - talking to gods, angels, demons, saints, ghosts, ancestors, and other non-physical entities - but it doesn't have to. You can cast a spell without ever mentioning a single deity. Chapman's Advanced Magick For Beginners discusses some of the techniques involved in this but skips others that make it much more likely for you to be able to say "this is what is going to happen now" and have the universe listen.

You can also have your magic deeply intertwined with your religion. Prayer is magic. A pantheon of gods or a list of angels, saints, or demons is a dictionary of specialists; ask this god for help with your problems involving going on a trip, ask this saint for help with finding a thing you lost, ask this demon for help with learning math. And part of how you make one of these entities more likely to lend a hand with your problem is by regularly saying hi to them and making some kind of offering, which is definitely getting into the territory of religion.

replies(1): >>45652873 #
11. shakna ◴[] No.45652873{3}[source]
Religion also doesn't require deities. Its just a framework for discussing a coalescing number of beliefs.

Atheism falls under the umbrella of religious studies, too.