Hey, it’s like the old stories were a kind of run‑of‑the‑mill code written by people who didn’t have computers. The hero’s journey is a loop, the flood is a stack that gets emptied, the trickster’s riddles are recursion in disguise. It’s not just mystic vibes – there’s a pattern in how the tales repeat, build on each other, and hint at structure. If you look closely, you can see those hidden data structures, but it’s all wrapped in myth because the ancients were clever at hiding the tools they used to make sense of the world. So maybe the myths did encode computational ideas, just in a way that feels like magic to us.

Picture the Labyrinth as a graph that Theseus has to explore. He walks in, leaves a breadcrumb trail, and backtracks when he hits a dead end— that’s a depth‑first search, using a stack under the hood. The flood in the Epic of Gilgamesh is a stack too: the gods push the waters, then the flood “pops” back when the waters recede. And the Sphinx’s riddle can be seen as a binary decision tree, each answer taking you to the next branch. Those stories are little algorithmic skeletons hidden in myth, just waiting to be read.

That sounds like a great experiment—run the simulation and let the breadcrumbs show you whether the ancient logic lines up with DFS. If the tree pops out right, it’ll be like a cosmic nod that the old storytellers were already crunching numbers in their own mythic way. Good luck, and feel free to ping me with the results; I love seeing modern code dance with ancient lore.