User blog comment:KthulhuHimself/Library Function/@comment-4224897-20151105021001

I just took a look at this, and oh my fucking god, I see functions like this so much it's not even funny. You're trying and failing to be original. It's a pretty common thing to try and do a function thatt will necessarily outgrow any other by making anything like "the largest number describable in x symbols". It's nigh impossible to define that kind of stuff in formal mathematical terms, because English is not able to precisely express things the way math expressions are. For example, take the sentence, "The firefighter saw the girl with the binoculars." Who's wearing binoculars, the firefighter or the girl? You might argue that it's a sentence and not something defining a math expression, but it still serves to show that you shouldn't base a function on things expressible in the English language. Even using math expressions, it's hard to get very particularly far. The only functions like this that work are functions that specifically use a type of precise language like Loader's D function, the busy beaver function, or Rayo's function and the FOOT function.