Piers Cawley schreef op 04 december 2001: > > 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.
-p trickery? In wc.pl?? I haven't found any reasonable -p solution there. -n yes. -p? Impossible. I think I would be at 87 if newlines were allowed, 84 with the & solution. > > (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. On the one hand, perhaps I could sleep easier then. On the other hand, you'll have much more incentive to look for solutions... Perhaps it's better without the best scores per hole. Eugene
