It's not the syllable count that matters, it's that anytime you have words with common endings, or words with unnecessarily added endings (like we're doing here), the root words need to rhyme as well as the endings.
Example: -er words. You can rhyme "teacher" with "reacher", but not with "plumber", even though all three have the same endings, technically.
It has to do with which syllable is stressed. The last stressed syllable in the word (or in the line of poetry), and everything after it, has to be the same. So the "-eacher" in "teacher" and "reacher" are identical, and it's a good rhyme. To rhyme with "hex", the word has to end in "-ex." You can fudge the consonants after the stressed vowel just a bit, and get something that's not quite a rhyme, but good enough for, say, a HN comment. But you can't fudge the stressed vowel at all.
What I was describing (where the last stressed vowel matches but the rest doesn't all match) is called assonance. This isn't even assonance, much less a rhyme. If you have a source describing this kind of not-a-rhyme from any period of English versification, I'd be interested to see it.
But in your examples, the last stressed vowel and the unstressed one, both match: reacher, teacher. Therefore I don't follow your comment.
There is a kind of assonance (or whatever) in English where the stressed one can differ. The juxtaposition of such words or endings can sound good. For instance "pitter-patter". This can be exploited to create a near rhyme, like my teacher and catcher verse.
Moreover, if it is the unstressed one that doesn't match, that is no longer the case. We cannot rhyme "teacher" with "teapot" as line endings.
states the same conditions you have given for perfect rhyme: stressed vowel and following unstressed, if any, are a match. Then it goes into the exceptions.
Read through the code golf website and hexagony comes up pretty frequently. I'm with you, it looks cool to see what others do, but I cant imagine jumping in and trying to make one myself.
It's pretty easy to get started. You do an easy problem with a big board. You think "maybe I can reuse some sections and cut down on the whitespace" and spend eternity optimizing it down to a neatly packed little hexagon (or quit trying). There's something really satisfying about reusing paths of code in ways you didn't initially think of.
But unlike Hexagonal Architecture this one actually has a proper reason for being called hexagonal.
Of all hexagonalisms, Hexagonal Architecture feels like the hardest to forgive.
They could've called it Avocado architecture - give the diagrams some color, even increase global demand for green whiteboard markers by 0.1% but nope... Would've sold just as well and would've made even more sense...
Quasicrystals are non-periodic hexagonal crystals that follow the same rules as mathematical penrose tiles. Here's a paper on some interesting theoretical phase transitions that are similar to the type of electron control you mention. https://journals.aps.org/prresearch/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev...
2D languages are fun! I created a flappy bird inspired programming language/puzzle game. It’s called Stacky Bird and never got popular but my kids liked it for a couple of days. https://game.stackybird.com/
Yes, it's a fungeoid (https://esolangs.org/wiki/Fungeoid), using a hexagonal grid. Ignoring dimensionality, non-square fungeoids are not novel e.g. hyperfunge (https://esolangs.org/wiki/Hyperfunge) uses pentagonal cells (it also uses a hypergrid, so each cell is surrounded by 20, 4 at each corner).
AI seems closer to malbolge (https://esolangs.org/wiki/Malbolge). It's not just that it's weird, it's also permanently shifting under you in ways you don't understand.
If 7 bit memory cells were suddenly cheap, we could build a hexagonal computer with 7 bit “bytes” where each byte has another 6 around it. Repeat with each ring with another set of the last group.
We would have a hierarchy of hexagonal cells. Maybe this could make for a numbering system. Since this could also represent real number in base 7
Thanks for the link. I am starting to get into simple but deep strategy board games. Is there a good place to find the best simple but deep strategy games?
https://youtu.be/thOifuHs6eY