[Pitch] #lolcode

Hello Swift Evolution,

Many in the Swift community have significant prior experience with dynamic and/or weakly typed languages and recognize that there are many benefits to not having a type system hold your hand throughout the process of development. Many have lamented the fact that Swift being a static language means they are less productive in it than a similar (often scripting-oriented) dynamic language. This has led to community calls for more dynamism to be added to the language. My co-author, @harlanhaskins , and I believe that we have a proposal that can put an end to this problem once and for all. And on this, the first of April, we present it to you and request your honest feedback.

~Robert Widmann

#lolcode Literals or: How Swiftc Learned to Stop Typechecking and Love Dynamic Code


We propose facilities for modern dynamic programming in the Swift programming language. To accomplish this we introduce new syntax for the creation of dynamic code, and new runtime support in the Swift Standard Library to match. With these changes, we hope to finally and totally address a long-standing criticism of the Swift programming language.


Since its inception, Swift has been criticized for adopting strong static typing despite having interoperability with legacy dynamic and weakly typed language code. Many have expressed frustration over this lost dynamism, and have called for Swift to be summarily extended to support more dynamic features. We intend to satisfy that overwhelming demand (and more) by introducing support for modern dynamic programming that complements and extends Swift.

Dynamic code is hailed by its supporters as being quicker to write, easier to read, and much more immediately gratifying to program with than static code. Popular dynamic languages like JavaScript and PHP are prime examples of this style of thinking - and we believe, as do the aforementioned critics of Swift, that these languages are perfect in every way, and that they
should stand as a model for all other languages. To that end, we propose the fusion of Swift's current (backwards) static approach with a forward-thinking dynamic approach.

LOLCode is a modern, imperative, dynamic programming language widely regarded as the natural successor to SmallTalk. Its consistent syntax and cheerful outlook on programming inspire confidence in even beginner users, and its support for interoperability with C make it a natural target for low level systems programming for advanced users.

Proposed solution

We intend to add a new magic literal, #lolcode(…) - whose syntax and usability ethos are directly inspired by the glorious minds that worked to include annex J in the ISO C and C++ standards. The #lolcode literal shall begin a new anonymous LOLCode function into which
LOLCode code may be written directly. LOLCode code in the #lolcode literal is directly executable and may accept values from Swift code as well as return values to Swift code.

var prod = 1
let n = 10
let factorial = #lolcode(
    prod R PRODUKT OF prod AN SUM OF i AN 1
  FOUND YR prod
  I HAZ A z
  I HAZ A x
  x R 6
  z R SUM of x and 76
  VISIBLE z BTW prints ’82’

To support LOLCode as a first class citizen, the compiler shall be changed to accept any file
with the extension .lol as LOLCode and shall compile it to a form compatible with any other
Swift code. All functions defined in LOLCode shall be available to other Swift files in the module,
and all declarations have shall have public access. All necessary Swift functions shall similarly
be available to LOLCode, and be directly callable using native I IZ <function> YR <arguments> MKAY syntax.

To our knowledge, this will make Swiftc the world's first optimizing compiler for LOLCode, and the world's first complete LOLCode-to-LLVM compiler.

Detailed design

Upon seeing a #lolcode literal in expression position, the parser will parse the LOLCode into a Swift closure that will be automatically called. These closures have type () -> Any, and (strongly) capture variables from outer scope.

Note that LOLCode's "Type System" defines NOOB (Void), NUMBR (Integer), NUMBAR (Double), YARN (String), TROOF (Bool), and BUKKIT (Array), values of other types will be converted to the appropriate LOLCode type, according to the following mappings:

Swift type LOLCode type
[U]Int[8/16/32/64] NUMBR (cast to Swift Int)
Float/Double/Float80 NUMBAR (cast to Swift Double)
String/All other types YARN (converted to String using string interpolation behavior)
Array BUKKIT (all inner values recursively converted to LOLCode equivalents)

LOLCode constructs will be parsed into their equivalent Swift constructs. An example of this mapping is given below:

LOLCode Equivalent Swift
I HAZ A var : Any
R =
FOUND YR return
SUM OF lhs AN rhs _lolcode_sum(lhs, rhs)
PRODUKT OF lhs AN rhs _lolcode_product(lhs, rhs)
QUOSHUNT OF lhs AN rhs _lolcode_quotient(lhs, rhs)
DIFF OF lhs AN rhs _lolcode_diff(lhs, rhs)
MOD OF lhs AN rhs _lolcode_mod(lhs, rhs)
BOTH SAEM lhs AN rhs _lolcode_both_saem(lhs, rhs)
DIFFRENT lhs AN rhs _lolcode_diffrent(lhs, rhs)
BOTH OF lhs AN rhs _lolcode_both_of(lhs, rhs)
EITHER lhs AN rhs _lolcode_either(lhs, rhs)
VISIBLE expr print(expr)
SMOOSH expr... _lolcode_smoosh(expr...)
GIMMEH lhs lhs = _lolcode_gimmeh()
MAEK expr A type _LOLCodeValue(expr).cast(to: .type).value
VISIBLE expr ! print(expr, terminator: “”)

The Swift Standard Library shall be modified with support for the LOLCode runtime and builtin operations. A model implementation of a generic LOLCode value and the complete type system of LOLCode is given as follows:

public enum _LOLCodeType: String {
  case yarn, numbar, numbr, noob, bukkit, troof

  var defaultValue: _LOLCodeValue {
    switch self {
    case .bukkit: return .bukkit([])
    case .noob: return .noob
    case .numbar: return .numbar(0.0)
    case .numbr: return .numbr(0)
    case .troof: return .troof(false)
    case .yarn: return .yarn("")

public enum _LOLCodeValue: Equatable {
  case yarn(String)
  case numbar(Double)
  case numbr(Int)
  case noob
  case bukkit([_LOLCodeValue])
  case troof(Bool)

  public static func == (lhs: _LOLCodeValue, prerhs: _LOLCodeValue) -> Bool {
    switch (lhs, rhs) {
    case let (.yarn(l), .yarn(r)): return l == r
    case let (.numbar(l), .numbar(r)): return l == r
    case let (.numbr(l), .numbr(r)): return l == r
    case let (.numbar(l), .numbr(r)): return l == Double(r)
    case let (.numbr(l), .numbar(r)): return Double(l) == r
    case (.noob, .noob): return true
    case let (.bukkit(l), .bukkit(r)): return l == r
    case let (.troof(l), .troof(r)): return l == r
    default: return false

  var _type: _LOLCodeType {
    switch self {
    case .yarn(_): return .yarn
    case .numbar(_): return .numbar
    case .numbr(_): return .numbr
    case .noob: return .noob
    case .bukkit(_): return .bukkit
    case .troof(_): return .troof

  var value: Any {
    switch self {
    case .yarn(let s): return s
    case .numbar(let d): return d
    case .numbr(let i): return i
    case .noob: return ()
    case .bukkit(let arr): return arr.map { $0.value }
    case .troof(let b): return b

  func cast(to type: _LOLCodeType) -> _LOLCodeValue {
    guard self._type != type else {
      return self

    switch (self, type) {
    case (_, .troof): return .troof(asTroof)
    case (_, .yarn): return .yarn("\(self.value)")
    case (.noob, let ty): return ty.defaultValue
    case let (.numbr(n), .numbar): return .numbar(Double(n))
    case let (.numbar(d), .numbr): return .numbr(Int(d))
    case let (.yarn(s), .numbar):
      guard let d = Double(s) else { break }
      return .numbar(d)
    case let (.yarn(s), .numbr):
      guard let i = Int(s, radix: 10) else { break }
      return .numbr(i)
    case let (.troof(b), .numbr): return .numbr(b ? 1 : 0)
    case let (.troof(b), .numbar): return .numbar(b ? 1 : 0)
    default: break
    fatalError("i cant maek '\(self)' in2 a '\(type.rawValue)'")

  var asTroof: Bool {
    switch self {
    case .yarn(let s):
      return s.contains("t") || s.contains("y") || s.contains("1")
    case .numbar(let n): return n != 0
    case .numbr(let n): return n != 0
    case .troof(let b): return b
    case .noob, .bukkit: return false

  init(_ value: Any) {
    switch value {
    case is Void:
      self = .noob
    case let value as _LOLCodeValue:
      self = value
    case let value as String:
      self = .yarn(value)
    case let value as Int:
      self = .numbr(value)
    case let value as Double:
      self = .numbar(value)
    case let value as Bool:
      self = .troof(value)
    case let value as [Any]:
      self = .bukkit(value.map(_LOLCodeValue.init))
    case let value as UInt8:
      self = .numbr(numericCast(value))
    case let value as UInt16:
      self = .numbr(numericCast(value))
    case let value as UInt32:
      self = .numbr(numericCast(value))
    case let value as UInt64:
      self = .numbr(numericCast(value))
    case let value as Int8:
      self = .numbr(numericCast(value))
    case let value as Int16:
      self = .numbr(numericCast(value))
    case let value as Int32:
      self = .numbr(numericCast(value))
    case let value as Int64:
      self = .numbr(numericCast(value))
    case let value as UInt:
      self = .numbr(numericCast(value))
    case let value as Float:
      self = .numbar(Double(value))
    case let value as Float80:
      self = .numbar(Double(value))
      self = .yarn("\(value)")

Because LOLCode maps directly to the Swift AST, no changes to the type system and very minimal changes to codegen are needed to support the entire language.

Source compatibility

This is a purely additive change. The only way it could impact source compatibility would be if LOLCode compiled in a former version of Swift, and we were really quite thorough about silencing viable competition and well-meaning naysayers.

EDIT: After publication, the authors have, in fact, identified a previous Swift proposal under which LOLCode constructs have made it into the language. We are deeply annoyed that the proposal in question has chosen the name "Access Control" to mask this fact.

Effect on ABI stability

The ABI Is Strong And Stable.

Effect on API resilience


Alternatives considered

In order for alternatives to have been considered, viable alternatives would have to exist. There simply is no dynamic language invented up to or before this point in time that could possibly support the march of Swift towards its inevitable dynamic future that is not LOLCode.


Oh, I almost forgot

In case you doubted our commitment, we have implemented this and boy does it work.


A very interesting pitch - but could you please fix the line breaks?
I think it's especially appealing as it should be possible to use the exactly same technique to embed other languages as well. Besides obvious choices like Whitespace and Brainfuck, a regex compiler might be a useful addition.

1 Like

So much work for an April joke. :+1:


I fix-
ed the line


1 Like

Thank's, @codafi.
The original text was quite hard to read on my AppleWatch because of the suboptimal formatting

1 Like

LOL, glad you got that out of your system : )

1 Like

Such nice, much dinamo

VISIBLE !+[]+[{}==![[!""]]+false]!=0 // true


It's a pity:
Like many good ideas, this one just doesn't get the attention it deserves.

In this case, it's especially unfortunate, as I'm convinced this pitch should receive special treatment, so that it can become an accepted proposal before the end of this day.
So, I'd like to propose some small improvements to increase general interest:

  1. Add a new protocol (LOLCodable). It should have no requirements, and do something funny with the conforming types (this move always worked great in the past)
  2. Add some examples for the fantastic opportunities of LOLCode for FRP, POP and JSON processing
  3. Rework the syntax of the literal - it should be something more fancy

As for 3), I suggest #lol🐯cute(...):
Swift really lacks cats, so that should be addressed anyways. U+1F42F currently has some usability issues because it is hard to type, but I think this problem can easily be addressed:
Apple not only controls Swift, but also a whole operating system, so the next release of macOS should simply replace ";" with ":tiger:". The semicolon is just a reminiscent of the past, and it's time to move on and reassign its place on the keyboard to something that's actually useful.


Still preferable to DynamicMemberLookup :stuck_out_tongue:

10/10 :ok_hand:t2:


My mind immediately went to this treasure trove of missing Swift functionality. For those with more refined tastes, this one is worth the time, too.

1 Like

needs more single quotes

If you drop the requirement that integers and doubles are can be compared, you can take advantage of the synthesized Equatable conformance. In fact, I strongly recommend dropping floating point support entirely; anyone who thinks they need precision after the decimal point is just showing off, anyway.

1 Like

When we were writing this patch we too felt an air of defeatism (and an impending sense of doom). But we are originalists in interpretation, and every word that Justin Meza typed must be followed down to the grapheme cluster.


Why the extra work? Scrap Swift and create bindings between Objective-C and Perl. That should make everyone happy.

1 Like