faq
code
osdn
awards
privacy
slashNET
older stuff
rob's page
preferences
submit story
advertising
supporters
past polls
topics
about
jobs
hof
|
| '15th IOCCC Results Posted' | Login/Create an Account | Top
| 103 comments |
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
Slashdot is not responsible for what they say.
|
Why bother? (Score:2, Funny)
by Metal Machine Music on Friday January 26, @08:00AM EST
(#3)
(User #255620 Info)
|
Very cool but...
What use is this? Surely winning this competition is a sign you should never work again? Obfuscated code (aka elegant) is no faster, even if it is shorter, and may even compile into worse code.
For me this shows the problm with open source - people are more interested in playing silly games than actually getting something constructive done.
Microsoft didn't get to be as successful as it did by creating obfuscated code you know.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
| |
|
<<Well... by pallex (Score:5)
| C has aged well ... by Anonymous Coward
>>
|
| Moderation Totals:Troll=1, Funny=1, Underrated=1, Total=3. |
Re:Why bother? (Score:1, Flamebait)
by turacma
(god@iam.com)
on Friday January 26, @08:05AM EST
(#6)
(User #266828 Info)
|
No, Microsoft became successful because the american public by and large wouldn't know good software if it jumped up and bit them on the ass.
And you know, just because you paid more for something, doesn't mean it's any better.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:-1, Troll)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 26, @08:11AM EST
(#13)
|
So true. I am Joe USA Public, I used Linux which sure bites and I sure dont know it as good software.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 26, @12:24PM EST
(#81)
|
This is a troll, but the parent is insightful. Fuck you, you fucking moderating moron lunix lusers.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1, Offtopic)
by pet-owningISslavery on Friday January 26, @08:14AM EST
(#16)
(User #307276 Info)
|
And you know, just because you paid more for something, doesn't mean it's any better.
Only under a deranged, half-baked system like capitalism would this be true. Only in such an outrageously silly system would it be acceptable or normal to attempt to cheat your fellow humans as a matter of course. Only under such a deranged set of principles would anybody refusing to scam his fellow (wo)man out of anything and everything be lauded as a role model or praised as a pillar of society. Don't even get me started on Forbes magazine's little list....
I'm sorry for going off on a tangent like this, but whenever I see this quote I'm just reminded of all that's wrong with the so-called "free world".
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
CORRECTION (Score:1)
by pet-owningISslavery on Friday January 26, @08:17AM EST
(#22)
(User #307276 Info)
|
Only under such a deranged set of principles would anybody refusing to scam his fellow (wo)man out of anything and everything be lauded as a role model or praised as a pillar of society. Don't even get me started on Forbes magazine's little list....
Only under such a deranged set of principles would anybody attempting to scam his fellow (wo)man out of anything and everything be lauded as a role model or praised as a pillar of society. Don't even get me started on Forbes magazine's little list....
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 26, @08:24AM EST
(#32)
|
I think you mean to say "not refusing to scam" or something like that... otherwise it don't make no sense.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:2)
by Reality Master 101
(RealityMaster101{at}hotmail{dot}com)
on Friday January 26, @09:58AM EST
(#66)
(User #179095 Info)
|
And you know, just because you paid more for something, doesn't mean it's any better. [...] Only under a deranged, half-baked system like capitalism would this be true.
Versus socialism? The difference is that under socialism, the government attempts to cheat the citizens as a matter of course. The difference is that there is only one government, and under capitalism, you can choose whichever company you percieve to cheat you the least.
And if you think socialistic government are paragons of virtue and efficiency with only the best interests of the citizens at heart, then I feel sorry for you and your naivete.
--
Every vote was counted. A ballot requiring any subjectiveness is not a vote. |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by pet-owningISslavery on Friday January 26, @10:11AM EST
(#68)
(User #307276 Info)
|
under capitalism, you can choose whichever company you percieve to cheat you the least.
Except it'll have the government to help it. See the British and the Dutch in Asia, the US in Latin America, and pretty much everyone in Africa. Then take into account how much money corporations spend funding campaigns for a rough estimate of what the effects can be domestically.
A democratic socialist society doesn't have any of this. I won't speak for autocratic or oligarchic ones.
and if you think socialistic government are paragons of virtue and efficiency with only the best interests of the citizens at heart, then I feel sorry for you and your naivete.
So a corporatist government combined with thousands of groups whose sole stated interest is to screw the consumer out of as much money as possible is better? How does that make any sense?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by Reality Master 101
(RealityMaster101{at}hotmail{dot}com)
on Friday January 26, @11:45AM EST
(#75)
(User #179095 Info)
|
So a corporatist government combined with thousands of groups whose sole stated interest is to screw the consumer out of as much money as possible is better? How does that make any sense?
Because governments have the force of law, and corporations do not. There is no law requiring me to use Microsoft software, Xerox copiers or Blue Shield medical insurance. Better that I have the freedom to choose the honest companies over the dishonest ones, rather than being screwed 100% of the time, by law, by the government.
--
Every vote was counted. A ballot requiring any subjectiveness is not a vote. |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by f5426 on Friday January 26, @12:37PM EST
(#83)
(User #144654 Info)
|
(bored, so I'll reply to that. I'll spend a couple of minutes, and practice my poor english).
Hi, reality master 101, how is your trolling session today ?
> There is no law requiring me to use Microsoft software
Wrong. Take DeCSS as an example. If you own a PC you are required to use Windows to view your DVDs. Law is here to enforce that. DMCA will give a new meaning to this. The law will not say "you are required to use window", but "it is illegal to use software non-approved by the industry", and, funnily, the industry will only approve windows software.
Sure, you can say that there is no law that forces you to buy a PC (at least now). In that case, there is no law that requires you do do anything, as you always have the possibility of reject your American citizenship.
> I have the freedom to choose the honest companies over the dishonest ones
There is no such thing as an honest (or dishonest) company. Don't anthropomorphize.
Cheers,
--fred
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by Reality Master 101
(RealityMaster101{at}hotmail{dot}com)
on Friday January 26, @03:34PM EST
(#95)
(User #179095 Info)
|
Hi, reality master 101, how is your trolling session today ?
So if someone disagrees with you, then they must be a troll?
The law will not say "you are required to use window", but "it is illegal to use software non-approved by the industry", and, funnily, the industry will only approve windows software.
Guess what? It's a product. You can choose to buy that product or not. We're not talking about food or housing, we're talking about a movie in a particular format. Note that it isn't even the only format you can buy. Read carefully: It's their product. They can do whatever they want with it. It's called "freedom". But since you appear to advocate socialism, freedom is a word you may not be familiar with.
There is no such thing as an honest (or dishonest) company. Don't anthropomorphize.
Try this word: "metaphor". You know what I mean, but instead you choose to deliberately pretend that you don't rather than make a substantive argument. And you accuse me of trolling?
--
Every vote was counted. A ballot requiring any subjectiveness is not a vote. |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by f5426 on Monday January 29, @06:55AM EST
(#101)
(User #144654 Info)
|
> So if someone disagrees with you, then they must be a troll?
First, if you did not want to play a troll here, you'd better have choosed a different nickname. "Reality Master 101" ?
Second, I use troll as a compliment.
Third, agreeing, disagreeing to a post content don't really mean anything. I hope you don't think your opinions are accurately represented in a few hundred of bytes.
> Guess what? It's a product. You can choose to buy that product or not. We're not talking about food or housing
Guess what ? Food, housing, health care, education are all products. So your 'it's a product' is basically casted to void.
> we're talking about a movie in a particular format. Note that it isn't even the only format you can buy
Is it ? <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000053 VBN/ref=v_dh_hir_6/107-9806512-4018115>
In 5 to 10 years, movies won't be released on VHS anymore. Don't pretend you don't know this.
> It's their product. They can do whatever they want with it.
The problem is that, when we have bought such product, DMCA will prevent me to say "It is my product. I can do whatever I want with it".
> It's called "freedom"
Yeah. The freedom to buy politician. The freedom to push scelerate laws. The freedom to replace the word 'citizen' by the word 'consumer'. All that kind of freedom.
> But since you appear to advocate socialism, freedom is a word you may not be familiar with
Please, don't assume anything.
> > There is no such thing as an honest (or dishonest) company. Don't anthropomorphize.
> You know what I mean, but instead you choose to deliberately pretend that you don't rather than make a substantive argument.
No. You choosed not to understand what I said. Let me repeat:
"There is no such thing as an honest (or dishonest) company. Don't anthropomorphize"
Like in:
'It's their product. They can do whatever they want with it. It's called "freedom"' You are confusing freedom of citizen with freedom to trade. Those concepts are totally different. You are anthropomorphizing corportations. Honesty dishonesty, freedom.
Companies are not honest or dishonest. They can't be. Even if they spend hundred of million to build a corporate image, a company have no moral standing. Not even the slighest one. They can't have. By definition.
Let's go to your original post:
> I have the freedom to choose the honest companies over the dishonest ones
I'd say that freedom is a word not familiar to you. The synonym 'liberty' would be more appropriate in your sentence. Freedom have connotations you don't seem to grasp. In particular, "the condition of being free of restraints". An _alternative_ between compeeting _corporations_ giving you _liberty_ of _choice_ don't carry most of the meanings of _freedom_.
Cheers,
--fred
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:2, Flamebait)
by bencc99
(ben@bencharlton.net)
on Friday January 26, @08:25AM EST
(#33)
(User #100555 Info)
http://www.bencharlton.net
|
No, Microsoft became successful because the american public by and large wouldn't know good software if it jumped up and bit them on the ass.
Wrong. Even by fluke they should have turned out something reasonable. For microsoft to consistently turn out products as bad as they do, they have to know *exactly* what a good product is, and work hard to make their software as unlike it as possible ;)
Visit Trekkers rest |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 26, @08:54AM EST
(#46)
|
Anyone who works in corporate software development knows that MS's attempts at bad software are *stellar* compared to some of the crap running "behind the firewall"
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Not true (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 26, @11:12AM EST
(#73)
|
the american public by and large wouldn't know good software if it jumped up and bit them on the ass.
I think we're all lucky Aibos don't have little steel teeth, because then we'd all know exactly what good programming feels like.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:2, Funny)
by ratbag on Friday January 26, @08:10AM EST
(#11)
(User #65209 Info)
|
Microsoft didn't get to be as successful as it did by creating obfuscated code you know.
No, they did it by putting Easter egg flight sims in their Office apps.
Rob.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:2, Funny)
by foistboinder on Friday January 26, @08:11AM EST
(#12)
(User #99286 Info)
http://www.amon-hen.com/jac
|
Microsoft didn't get to be as successful as it did by creating obfuscated code you know.
Based on what I've seen of Microsoft
Code, I have to disagree.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:2, Interesting)
by Howie
(howie-news@thingy.com)
on Friday January 26, @08:51AM EST
(#45)
(User #4244 Info)
http://wotsit.thingy.com/
|
I know you just wanted a cheap shot, and hey, this is the audience for it, but I would suggest you read either Writing Solid Code or Code Complete, both published by Microsoft Press, and both supposedly based on internal MS coding practice. They are very good examples of the ways in which you can write easy-to-read, easy-to-debug, easy-to-maintain code.
Regardless of what the front office does and decides as a direction, there are some pretty clever people at Microsoft (not to mention Microsoft Research - Blinn, Kajiya, Gray, and many others).
(of course, feel free to add a more illuminating comment if it wasn't just the usual MS==BAD)
--
For an additional sum, I can install this green button to go back down... |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by ochinko
(ochinko@yahoo.com)
on Friday January 26, @09:46AM EST
(#61)
(User #19311 Info)
|
My only guess would be that you hate msft in the guts. Of all the programming books that you could have recommended, how could you suggest Writing Solid Code?
I have the book and I read it more than once. There is nothing there that you wouldn't be able to find in hundreds of other books. BTW, people that still use Hungarian notation for variable naming must be rare that COBOL programmers.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by Howie
(howie-news@thingy.com)
on Friday January 26, @11:08AM EST
(#72)
(User #4244 Info)
http://wotsit.thingy.com/
|
The point was more that MS have some sort of idea about quality code, not that they produced the One True Programming Book.
Anyway, please name some (no, really) - I've been looking around for books that cover the practice of programming, not a language reference or tutorial, and not a specific discipline. All I really came up with is Kernighan's Practice Of Programming, and some of Programming Pearls. They also both share Solid Code's anecdotal style, which I liked.
Re: Hungarian Notation - anyone whoe learned Windows programming early, from Petzold would have soaked it up - I know I did for Windows programming - although I don't do a lot of that at the moment. I suspect it's around more than you think, particularly in the windows world.
--
For an additional sum, I can install this green button to go back down... |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:0, Flamebait)
by f5426 on Friday January 26, @08:14AM EST
(#17)
(User #144654 Info)
|
| Microsoft didn't get to be as successful as it did by creating obfuscated code you know.
You are right. Microsoft didn't get to be as successful as it did only by creating obfuscated code Cheers, --fred Btw, how is your bridge ?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:3, Insightful)
by Psiren on Friday January 26, @08:14AM EST
(#18)
(User #6145 Info)
http://www.hibernaculum.demon.co.uk
|
For me this shows the problm with open source - people are more interested in playing silly games than actually getting something constructive done.
I can just see Kryten now... "Fun? Ah, yes. The employment of time in a profitless and non-practicable way." So what if it's pointless. It's nice to do seomthing for fun every now and then. We aren't supposed to be writing top-notch code 24/7.
I'm only interested in the future, because I'll be spending the rest of my life there. |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by gowen on Friday January 26, @09:18AM EST
(#56)
(User #141411 Info)
|
For me this shows the problm with open source - people are more interested in playing silly games than actually getting something constructive done.
Oh, right. If you believe thats unique to Open Source, then I bet you a pound to a penny you've worked in an office with more than 2 people in it.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by glgraca on Friday January 26, @08:17AM EST
(#21)
(User #105308 Info)
|
WTH has the IOCC to do with the Open Source
movement??
If you canīt understand people wanting just
wanting to have fun, shoot your sorry self.
I bet you have a hobby other people would
consider silly.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
| |
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by madenosine
(SuperHacker@aol.com)
on Friday January 26, @08:18AM EST
(#25)
(User #199677 Info)
http://pacificpages.com/
|
It's not supposed to have any practical use, like many other things, it's just for fun and kicks. Come on, man not everything has to be formal and uptight.
linux::windows :/usr/src::A vault 30 miles underground in washington |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:2, Interesting)
by Aunt Mable on Friday January 26, @08:20AM EST
(#26)
(User #301965 Info)
http://www.blueberrypie.com
|
| Lovely TRoLL BTW, the little tacked on MS jab, neato.
Understanding obfuscated code is difficult - that's the whole point - therefore those who understand it (especially those that write it) have a firm grasp of the language - moreso than programmers that don't.
Also obfuscated code is usually about short snippets of well crafted code rather than worrying about a greater architecture. Competitions like this let people show off clever algorithms, or just clever syntax. Useful, as programmers can use the obfuscated code rather than typing a dozen lines.
Perl has been called the obfuscated programming language because of it's many short-hand syntaxes that reward those that know the language by not forcing them to be verbose - this can show off similar techniques.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
LOGO |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by jallen02
(:-( .)
on Friday January 26, @09:06AM EST
(#52)
(User #124384 Info)
http://gdev.net/%60jallen
|
Heh, this was another admittance by a perl programmer that the language is designed to be obfuscated.
Okay okay so I am taking what you said and adding one step to it in that direction but it sure sounds like that is what you are saying ;)
First you go on about how people can not worry about design and structure at all and talk about clever syntax rather than typing a dozen lines of.. (easier to read for a mortal) code.
Then you say perl is called obfuscated because its encouraged to be "cool" and learn these shrotcuts so that a lesser (mortal?!#@$) cant read the code?
Hmmn.. :) I dont know but one could draw some itneresting lines of thinking from this kind of stuff..
You did a nice post in not actually saying any of that which makes it good in the sense that you are not saying good or bad or giving away anything about whether you think it is good or bad, but I think what gives it away is "reward those that know the language by not forcing them to be verbose - this can shopw off similar technique" So every day in the life of a perl guru is to see how many shrotcuts they can use and show off their technique, afterall they are being rewarded with the shrotcuts they spent hours learning to use when they could use a piece of code we could all grasp a bit easier.????
Jeremy
--Insert Quarter Here[]-- |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by Aunt Mable on Friday January 26, @09:51AM EST
(#63)
(User #301965 Info)
http://www.blueberrypie.com
|
| You may either spend thirty seconds typing out an obfuscated and elegant piece of code - or spend two minutes to achieve the same ends but in a well formatted easily understood way.
The first and obfuscated way is good for personal projects - putting together shoddy perl scripts. Especially projects that are too short to bother about maintainability. So far as short bits of code go they require the most skill also.
The second is mostly for large projects or ones that require several programmers at the same time or the future.
Obfuscated code contests are about wank factor and showing off how well one knows a language. But as I say in the second paragraph they have their uses.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
LOGO |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 26, @09:13AM EST
(#53)
|
You want short snippets of well crafted code? Go look at some assembly language. I've seen things done in 200 bytes that could never be done in any other language.
I agree with the original poster, these "obfuscated code" contests are a complete waste of time. You don't see architects trying to design the shittiest buildings possible, but still have them stand, do you?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Obfuscated != Well crafted (was Re:Why bother?) (Score:3, Insightful)
by Simon Brooke on Friday January 26, @11:22AM EST
(#74)
(User #45012 Info)
http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
|
| Uhhmmm...
I really enjoy the IOCCC, and every year I download the results and play with them. Some are startlingly clever, like the flight simulator a couple of years ago. Writing these obfuscated programs is a special skill, and, yes, it is a form of craftsmanship within the context of the competition. And, of course, the people who can write these little gems have to be brilliant programmers first.
But in all normal circumstances, obfuscated code in any language is bad code . The whole purpose of highlevel languages is to communicate with human beings, not to communicate with the machine: to communicate with the programmer who is to come after you, who has to debug your code, or port it, or update it because some library it uses is obsolete and some of the API has been deprecated or dropped. That programmer may of course be you.
Code that can't be picked up by someone else in six months time - someone possibly less skilled than yourself, and read, and understood, and modified, is poorly crafted. Bad workmanship. If you can't understand this, you aren't going to be a successful member of any development team, either commercial or open source.
Enjoy the IOCCC as a cort of cross between puzzle games, satire, and poetry. A very special kind of programming - a very skilled kind of programming - but one which has virtually no carry-over into the real world.
;; It appears that /dev/null is a conforming XSL processor. |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Obfuscated != Well crafted (was Re:Why bother?) (Score:1)
by Aunt Mable on Friday January 26, @12:11PM EST
(#79)
(User #301965 Info)
http://www.blueberrypie.com
|
But in all normal circumstances, obfuscated code in any language is bad code
Well.. the debatable bit is what you define as normal. When I'm knocking out a ten line perl script I can use something I saw in an obfuscated contest because it's got such simple syntax and saves me time.
Not every bit of code is made to be inherited or worked on as a team. Many times it's just a ten line perl script that's required and these contests are great for learning shortcuts in those little bits of code (or what we type into the command line actually - obfuscation is wonderful there).
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
LOGO |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Bollocks (Score:1)
by Lozzer on Friday January 26, @12:38PM EST
(#84)
(User #141543 Info)
|
The whole point of any computer language is to get the friggin machine to do something. Maintabilty is a desirable extra I'll admit but nice looking code that does fuck all is pretty useless.
Special Relativity: The person in the other queue thinks yours is moving faster. |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by pallex
(p.a.l.l.e.x.@.m.y.-.d.e.j.a...c.o.m.)
on Friday January 26, @08:24AM EST
(#31)
(User #126468 Info)
http://pallex.webjump.com
|
"What use is this? "
Its just a laugh. Don`t worry about it.
"For me this shows the problm with open source"
Whats it got to do with open source?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:3, Informative)
by tonyPick
(tonyDOTpickeringATpaceDOTcoDOTuk)
on Friday January 26, @08:28AM EST
(#37)
(User #161066 Info)
|
What use is this? Surely winning this competition is a sign you should never work again? Obfuscated code (aka elegant) is no faster, even if it is shorter, and may even compile into worse code.
Well, (IMO) you're completely wrong. IOCC code isn't just "bad code getting awards". the winners of the IOCC show an understanding of the subtleties of the way the C language work far beyond that of your average C programmer, or even your pretty good C programmer.
Or, to quote Peter Van Der Linden, "..[The IOCC] is a lot of fun and can extend your knowledge in surprising ways".
Spend a few hours or looking through the archives at things like "best one liners" and try and figure out what they do without reading the description - or maybe look through gems like the 1500 character BASIC interpreter. Deobfuscate some entries to figure out how they work and you might find you learn something about what the language can do and it might improve your day to day programming.
For me this shows the problm with open source - people are more interested in playing silly games than actually getting something constructive done.
Yuk, Trollish.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:2, Insightful)
by jallen02
(:-( .)
on Friday January 26, @09:16AM EST
(#54)
(User #124384 Info)
http://gdev.net/%60jallen
|
That is very true.. One of the first things you are going to do if you dream of entering a obfuscated program in this contest is totally read front back and carry with you for days on end a reference about how an ANSI C Compiler behaves. *exactly* How the preprocessor behaves and what its precise behavior is supposed to be, then your going to actually test it to find out if its really all true. A great book like "C A reference manual" It goes over excruiciating detail on how various parts of the language work.
Just by virtue of spending *so* much time figuring out how to push the language you are going to learn a whole lot.
Going reverse and actually reverse engineering one of these programs you may or may not learn as much, but chances are good you will be gifted with a good deal of insight about C :)
Ive tried and managed to undo several but some of these programs are truly works of art in the truest sense of the word art.
Okay so it may not be valuable in the sense regular art is however the sheer intelligence and amount of effort some people put into this the only word that comes to mind to express elegantly exactly what these programs are to a programmer is art :)
My two cents..
Jeremy
--Insert Quarter Here[]-- |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Why Troll? (Score:0, Troll)
by Arkleseizure on Friday January 26, @08:35AM EST
(#41)
(User #251525 Info)
|
I know it's offtopic and I'll be modded down and probably flamed but I'm actually genuinely interested. A lot of people seem to put quite a bit of effort into perfecting the art of the troll. I just can't see why. I've seen loads of trolls and loads of people complaining about them and even a detailed FAQ on how to do it, but noone has actually explained why.
If I tried it I think I'd probably get rather bored after a few goes, but some people really seem to get a kick out of it. It'd make an interesting psychology thesis.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Why Troll? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 26, @08:54AM EST
(#47)
|
Offtopic or not, why not ask yourself why you post to Slashdot at all.
Huh?
Do you think your opinions make any difference - of course not.
Trolling's just a way to have fun by winding people up. It's a lot more fun to cause havoc than to just have your post there, unreplied-to and unread.
And incidentally, trolls make a positive contribution to Slashdot, since they provoke discussion - the raison d'etre of Slashdot.
They are just a bit of fun.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why Troll? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 26, @08:55AM EST
(#48)
|
No it wouldn't. People do it because most hardcore Linux users here are very defensive and shoot from the hip. Just look at the replies to this post, an obvious troll from sentence 1. It is hilarious to infuriate them, why? I guess it is just hard for trolls to believe that anyone would care so much about an _operating system_. So it is quite funny to get them riled up.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by CoolVibe
(rot13://pbbyivor@unpxreurnira.bet)
on Friday January 26, @09:48AM EST
(#62)
(User #11466 Info)
http://www.hackerheaven.org
|
For me this shows the problm with open source - people are more interested in playing silly games than actually getting something constructive done.
Time enjoyed wasting is *not* wasted time. Think about it...
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:5, Funny)
by rincefysh on Friday January 26, @09:55AM EST
(#64)
(User #309635 Info)
|
I couldn't disagree more. I won in 1991 (and later - eg 2000 ;-)), just about the time that I was applying for a job. I put 'winning the IOCCC' in my CV, which may sound like suicide to some.
However consider this. Would you like to work for a boss who feels that winning the IOCCC is something to be ashamed from? Or would you rather work for a boss who feels it's a decent bit of fun?
I later found out that after dwindling the job candidates down there were just two suitable people left - I was one of them. My boss told me that winning the IOCCC was one of the factors that helped him to pick me over the other candidate.
So in conclusion - it can actuall _help_ your job prospects!
(Yes I know it's a troll, but who cares.)
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by Bastian on Friday January 26, @11:49AM EST
(#76)
(User #66383 Info)
|
If I were in charge of hire'nfire, I'd see winning the IOCCC as a definite plus. . . to write a well-obfuscated C program takes good knowledge of C and a love for programming, are both hopefully Good Things in the eyes of an employer.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by rincefysh on Friday January 26, @01:13PM EST
(#91)
(User #309635 Info)
|
I assume he doesn't expect you to write code in
a similar fashion? :-)
A friend of mine was asked to fix a bug in his bosses code, which turned out to be a BASIC program. The program was only 10 lines long, but it contained 13 GOTO statements! After extensive analysis it turned out that 3 of the lines were no longer possible to even get to! It's frightening that it was so well obfuscated, by accident.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Microsoft code (Score:1)
by raptwithal on Friday January 26, @09:58AM EST
(#65)
(User #134137 Info)
http://www.geocities.com/raptwithal
|
How in the world could you know anything about Microsoft code, unless you work for them? They could code in hex (yeah, riiight) and no one would be able to tell from the binaries anyway.
The bit about Open Source . . . you get all these interesting 'games' as you call them, but to me that's people being interested in what they do! An important principle of Open Source or Free Software is that people love to code.
"I only ask to be free. The butterflies are free."
-- Charles Lewis |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Because... (Score:1)
by dazedNconfuzed on Friday January 26, @10:21AM EST
(#69)
(User #154242 Info)
|
"Strange how much human accomplishment and progress comes from contemplation of the irrelevant."
- Scott Kim
This ID created purely to suppress JonKatz's articles. |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by Pembroke on Friday January 26, @09:18PM EST
(#98)
(User #264266 Info)
|
When it comes right down to it, the success of microsoft has a great deal more to Bill Gates being in the right place at the right time. He started his company at a point when computing was anything but a mainstream event. Then he lucked out by having IBM choose his OS to load on their machines. They lucked out in that IBM and compatibles became the type of computer that people chose to buy, and which programmers therefor chose to support. Bill Gates was holding the rope when the baloon went through the roof, and that's pretty much all you can say.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
by chongo
(slashdot-mail at asthe dot com)
on Friday January 26, @09:46PM EST
(#99)
(User #113839 Info)
http://www.isthe.com/chongo/index.html
|
| Why bother with the IOCCC?
- To test C compilers. The IOCCC has uncovered
a number of compiler bugs.
- To gain practice debugging ugly code.
I founded the IOCCC back in 1984 as reaction to
having just fixed a bug in the Bourne Shell.
- To learn subtle aspects of the C language.
- To illustrate through the irony of
functional but poorly written code the importance of good writing style.
- To put it on your resume. Reasonable places
consider a good thing to be part of the IOCCC.
- To have fun! [[Judging may be a lot of work,
but it is also a fun^3]]
... and if that does not satisfy you:
Search for the word ioccc in that web page. :-)
chongo /\oo/\ |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
