Rick Klement <rklement@pacbell.net> writes: > Jeff 'japhy' Pinyan wrote: >> >> On Dec 4, Andrew.Savige@ir.com said: >> >> >This game has proved more popular than I expected! >> >I am travelling for the next day or so and my family >> >are starting to ask what am I doing locked away in the >> >computer room. So, please keep sending me your entries, >> >but in the interests of torturing your opponents, feel >> >free to also post your tsanta.pl-verified golf score >> >(not source!) directly to fwp. >> >> As goaded, I'm now at 92, thanks to a word or two of wisdom from >> Piers; sans assistance, I'm at 94, and I don't see much room for >> deprovement. >> > > I'm now at 92 with no assistance :) Cool. > Mine are all simple straightforward perl, with only one using a > command line switch, and then just with the obvious usage, none of > this hinted trickery. I guess I'm just not trying hard enough. :) Hmm. Oh yeah, I just got rid of the -p trickery I was using in wc.pl. Shame about the 'all on one line' rule or I'd be down to 90 now... How Eugene got down to 89 is a completely mystery though. > I AM very curious about the "creative-in-the-extreme" entries, and > it's going to a long tough wait to see some of these interesting > efforts. I think the particular 'creative in the extreme' entry that Andrew was referring to was my head.pl that printed 10 lines then crashed using: #!perl -p 11..& (I don't think it's really a secret any more, I've posted it on my use.perl journal already so what the hell) > (Of course, I'd also like to see the "best score per hole", but I > guess that got "voted down".) Seems so. I'd like to know what the best scores per hole are. -- Piers "It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite." -- Jane Austen?Thread Previous | Thread Next