\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{xltxtra}
\usepackage[none]{hyphenat}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{polyglossia}
\setmainlanguage{english}
\setotherlanguages{sanskrit}
\newfontfamily\devanagarifont[Script=Devanagari]{Noto Serif Devanagari}
\newcommand{\zdn}[1]{\begin{sanskrit}#1\end{sanskrit}}
\newcommand{\zcode}[1]{\textasciigrave{}#1\textasciigrave{}}
\newcommand{\crossschwa}[1]{\lower.05cm\hbox{\rotatebox{45}{\begin{tikzpicture}[#1]
\draw (-1,1) -- (-1,0) -- (1,0) -- (1,-1);
\draw (-1,-1) -- (0,-1) -- (0,1) -- (1,1);
\fill (-0.5,-0.5) circle[radius=2.25pt];
\fill (-0.5,0.5) circle[radius=2.25pt];
\fill (0.5,-0.5) circle[radius=2.25pt];
\fill (0.5,0.5) circle[radius=2.25pt];
\end{tikzpicture}}}} %https://tex.stackexchange.com/q/263269
\title{issue(115).}
\author{\crossschwa{scale=0.16} \zdn{\char"0936\char"094D\char"092F\char"093E\char"092E} \crossschwa{scale=0.16}}
\date{HE 12022.06.28}
\begin{document}
\maketitle
\abstract{\zdn{\char"0950} In this \XeLaTeX{} document, I present my work in brainstorming how Prolog handles Indic scripts; for a second time, in response to ``the daily build swipl-w64-2022-06-24.exe''. Noto Serif Devanagari is the best font in the Raspberry Pi repos. All content used for academic purposes.}
\tableofcontents
\section{I remain skeptical \#commentreasure} % @the_speed_of_light @lightspeed @ftl}
% ^^^^^ ^ ^ ^
% │││││ │ │ └ some incursive recursive madness i'll take care of later; make a date 'n' every"-thing" self settles
% │││││ └───────────┴ my future selves's optimised models
% ││││└ my derelict dialect; codenamed "mirage", pronounced "मी रैज् ॥"
% ││└┼ me cast adrift; "are we there yet?"@log,_like_a_pro;_err…
% │└─┴ space
% └ airlock
This seems shallow.
What happens for \texttt{`is/2`}?
I can't imagine anyone wanting to input one script, and outputting another; from a hacking perspective.
My RFC was they should be equal (\texttt{`==/2`}), but should not unify (\texttt{`=/2`}); now I realise this is a deeper issue, but the (more) informative error message from my RFC still stands, or the inconsistency from the prior section looks buggy, but Perl taught me bugs are byproducts of features, and now I've adapted this philosophy to Prolog.
\subsection{Compromisation}
My compromise is to just use Prolog the same as before I started learning Sanskrit, and do some"-thing" along the lines of this:
\\\texttt{devnum(D,N) :- ground(N), nth0(N,[}\zdn{०}\texttt{,}\zdn{१}\texttt{,}\zdn{२}\texttt{,}\zdn{३}\texttt{,}\zdn{४}\texttt{,}\zdn{५}\texttt{,}\zdn{६}\texttt{,}\zdn{७}\texttt{,}\zdn{८}\texttt{,}\zdn{९}\texttt{],D). \%commentreasure} %D never needs grounding, since D becomes N through unification; I'm not convinced this will even work as intended, but was planning on using atom_chars(Atomic_D,Lithp_D)
\section{I reject your' reality, and substitute my own!!! :D \#eject\_2:\_infinity,\_and\_beyond!!!\_:D}
I'm going to hack my own self-hosted dialect; reinventing each, and every, (key) component part of each, and every, wheel, while inventing some new ones, and \texttt{s/getting/setting/} the time right (this time), whilst I am, locatively, at it; future proofing it, so it is (well, and truly) ``good for over a hundred years'', or even ``good forever''; even after the heat death of the multiverse, and into the following cyclic multiverses.
\end{document}
