On Sunday 02 December 2007 16:26:14 Zefram wrote: > Josiah Worcester wrote: > >I intend, without two objections, to create the following contract for the > >purposes of a contest: > > That mechanism is currently broken. Proposal 5305 added the requirement > to rule 2136 for a contest to be "a dependent contract", but failed to > amend rule 1742 to define "dependent contract". > > >The author of this program is awarded 1 point for each character that it is > >less in size than the second-place program. > > Problem if e wins by more than 10 characters. > > -zefram >
Read the current draft, please. I wasn't aware of the bit about dependent contracts not being done right, though.
