12
\$\begingroup\$

I have an answer to this question that is quite long. It is the best I can do and no one else has answered the question in the language (I am using Brain-Flak).

However my answer is very large (7e618). It would require more bytes than there exists atoms in the observable universe to store the answer uncompressed. I cannot include the answer for obvious reasons but I can include a very simple way to generate it given enough time and computational power.

Is there any policy on the upper limit of answer sizes? Should there be?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ The technical answer is that answers can be up to 30k characters. If you can describe a way to generate over 30k characters, or link to them then that is fine. However there's another issue. How can you be confident that a program that large (and untestable) meets the requirements of the challenge? It's not that I doubt you, it's just that 7e618 is an astonishingly large number, and I can't comprehend how to prove that an untestably large program is a proper quine. Especially in a language as painful as brain-flak. \$\endgroup\$ – DJMcMayhem Oct 4 '16 at 4:45
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @DJMcMayhem I can indeed demonstrate that the code works as intended and create a generative formula. The code has a very clear and well defined pattern that makes it the size it is. \$\endgroup\$ – Sriotchilism O'Zaic Oct 4 '16 at 4:48
  • \$\begingroup\$ ---That... isn't a link to your answer...--- Ah, it's a link to the question? I would recommend removing the anchor so that it doesn't jump down below the question body when you navigate to the page. \$\endgroup\$ – wizzwizz4 Oct 17 '16 at 19:54
10
\$\begingroup\$

If you can describe the program and show why it works, then definitely

People have done this sort of thing many times before, myself included: https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/a/58557/31343 (This one's description was much simpler than yours, but the same principle applies)

There is no reason to restrict answers to those that can be manually written out, and if you make it clear why your answer would work, then it should be completely fine.

P.S: Awesome, a brain-flak quine!

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .