in reply to RE: RE: This, too, was wasted on my wife.
in thread This, too, was wasted on my wife.

I agree. You can't say it sucks with out an explanation.
As for me, I don't think it sucks. But I also don't think it is obfuscated. Perhaps this is because it is really similar to the program I posted a couple days ago in the obfuscated section and so I see exactly what it is doing. So while I don't think it sucks, I do think it is un-original and less then obfuscated.

NOTE: I've noticed that this is actually filed under Craft, and not Obfuscated code... I would have sworn I saw this under obfuscated.

  • Comment on RE: RE: RE: This, too, was wasted on my wife.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
RE: RE: RE: RE: This, too, was wasted on my wife.
by cciulla (Friar) on Apr 29, 2000 at 02:53 UTC
    It's not supposed to be obfusicated, hence it's inclusion in "Craft."

    As to the similarity to a previously posted node, please include the link as I would be interested in seeing it.

    Thanks!

    Addendum
    If My first attempt at obfuscation is it, I did see it (and even voted++).

    I agree that it is somewhat similar. Perhaps your code imbeded itself in my subconscious.

[reply]
      It's not supposed to be obfusicated, hence it's inclusion in "Craft."

      Sorry, it sucks even worse as "Craft" than as "obfuscated". Indeed, it's hard to envision any possible intent for the code above than as "obfu". The fact that it prints JAPH is quite the giveaway. The fact that isn't particularly novel or obfuscated is pretty irrelevant.

      Between the mind which plans and the hands which build, there must be a mediator... and this mediator must be the heart.
[reply]

In Section Craft