It is incredibly slow, at least compared with the original chemlambda version. I tried it with ackermann(2,2), used many times before related to chemlambda. Here is it:
- I am a js noob and I made some time consuming mistakes, I hope so!
- or the program, which is written this time for humans, it spends the most time to give meaning to stuff, which is of course time consuming,
- or js is not good for this and I should pass to something else, like C.
- the project asks how can we anchor a cost to a computation?
- also, there is nothing special to the models of computation we have. Probably we just fond a drop in the ocean of possibilities. See the 14400 alternatives to the beta rewrite.
- which hopefully brings the desire to have your own, private, “poured only once”, model of computation, incomprehensible to anybody else.
- if you don’t think that there are as many other models of computation, I can prove you wrong by showing several other alternatives, which you know (or specialist know) as calculus, or knot theory 🙂
But for this, and also for other reasons (like if I want to paint a canvas 5 times/second to show you the molecules and (reasonable) physics in action), I have to know if I can do it as fast as I did it with not for humans scripts in awk used previously.
Not to talk about gamifying all this stuff, which is certainly possible if this first step is sufficiently fast.
And finally, I ask: why does a browser have a 1GB footprint if I can’t do fast things like this? Is like I am in a kitchen, preparing some fancy food, and over my shoulder there is always a policeman which asks me: “is this a crumb of bread? let me put it in the heap of bread crumbs. Is this a piece of a potato, let me put it in the heap of potato pieces”. Why, policeman? Who gives a shit? I certainly know what to keep and what to throw away! “Is for your help”, says the policeman. Well, FY, if so, give me back the GOTO and give me a break.
But probably I am a js noob. Hope so. Prove me so.