Eugene van der Pijll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 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.
My solution uses -p also, but at 94 I'm guessing you already have a shorter solution. Is everyone still hacking away at this? I gave up yesterday when I could only shave off one stroke and I'm not going to dig up the middle-line thread that I didn't read. Let's see a final tally! -- Rick Delaney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
