in reply to Re: Completely different algorithm
in thread Is Perl less compact than Ruby? (Kind of competition)
Now world record is 290 bytes:
sub p{$_=pop@n}sub w{push@n,@_}$/=$T;$_=uc<>;s#.#+{qw(E 7$0=p;p;w+int$ +_/$0,$_%$0 H 0p;w$n[-1-abs];$_>0&&splice@n,-2-$_,1 I 4w+($_=getc)?ord:-1 A 2w$L+1 + N 5w$N++ S 6w-(p)+p O 3print+chr(p) T 1$t=p;p&&goto"L$t")}->{$&}=~/./&&"\$N?$&> +6?\$N=0:". "w $&+7*p:do{$'};"#eg;s/^/L${\++$i}:\$L=$i;/mg;eval
Everything working as expected, no cheating.
We did it! Perl is winner!
It also adds the (missing?) newline
Nope, it was ok. I also fixed warning and unused last label.
Please note that Tic-Tac-Toe program unrolled to around megabyte of Perl code, so eval takes some time.
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re: *** japhy's qw is GODLIKE ***
by japhy (Canon) on Feb 20, 2002 at 21:40 UTC | |
by Matts (Deacon) on Feb 21, 2002 at 08:08 UTC | |
by japhy (Canon) on Feb 21, 2002 at 08:57 UTC | |
|
Re: *** japhy's qw is GODLIKE ***
by japhy (Canon) on Feb 20, 2002 at 21:19 UTC | |
by locked_user mtve (Deacon) on Feb 20, 2002 at 21:27 UTC | |
by japhy (Canon) on Feb 20, 2002 at 21:46 UTC | |
by locked_user mtve (Deacon) on Feb 21, 2002 at 07:22 UTC |