in reply to Steal This Code

That brings up a question i've been meaning to ask for a while.... Which of the following is correct (or perhaps cannonical)? BTW, nice obfu..... I'm off to defu it now.

Update: Defu: 

$_ = "r\@56O4\@FCE6DJO\@7OE96O!6C=>\@?<DO|@?2DE6CJ\n";
tr/ -}/O-} -N/;
print $_;

[download]
of course the *evil* part of this fu is still there, namely that in the the tr, '-' isn't literal.

-Blake

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(ichimunki) Re x 2: (OT)Steal This Code
by ichimunki (Priest) on Oct 03, 2001 at 04:14 UTC
    Perl Monks, PerlMonks, perlmonks, and PM are all canonical. From the banner graphic in the upper-right, we see "Perl Monks". From the nodelets down the side, "the monastery", "... the Monastery", "Perl Monks Site FAQ", "Perl Monks User...", "Perl Monks Merchandise", "Buy PerlMonks Gear..." (your nodelets may vary). From the PM Merchandise banner ad (upper left), "PerlMonks Merchandise". From the page footer "PerlMonks somehow...". And of course, there is the URL itself, "perlmonks".

    I guess there's more than one way to do it. :)
[reply]

      BTW, both Perl Mongers and Perl Monks being PM is rather annoying. Then again, perl can sometimes go well over the brink of ambiguity. That's what makes the parser and lexer feedback into eachother. 

      Thanks,
James Mastros,
Just Another Perl Initate
[reply]
Re: Re: Steal This Code
by George_Sherston (Vicar) on Oct 03, 2001 at 22:43 UTC
    I think any of them is fine, so long as one always uses the canonical spelling of 'monestary' :)

    § George Sherston
[reply]

In Section Obfuscated Code