User blog:TheMostAwesomer/I'm assuming that this isn't as strong as it could be.

I got bored and began defining numbers, and got up to a "tennier", which is {10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10} in BEAF. This is clearly a tad cumbersome (there's ten arguments), so I decided to do what a couple dozen other people certainly have and compress it into a two-argument function: ⟨a,b⟩. Alternatively,  or {[a,b]}. The first argument defines what's being repeated, and the second determines how many times it's repeated. Under this, the "tennier" is ⟨10,10⟩, which is much more comprehensible, at least to read. I then thought, hey, maybe I could use multiple arguments?

The rule for multiple arguments is defined as follows: ⟨a,b,c⟩ as ⟨a,⟨b,c⟩⟩, ⟨a,b,c,d⟩ as ⟨a,b,⟨c,d⟩⟩ (which is itself ⟨a,⟨b,⟨c,d⟩⟩⟩), and so on. Essentially, you take the last two arguments, put them into their own compressed BEAF function, drop the amount of arguments by one, and put the last two arguments in said form into the last argument, where most of the power is held. This itself can become cumbersome (mostly if you want to write it as two arguments), but is a darn sight better.

Is there any way to optimize the rule for multiple arguments, to make it even stronger?