God-damn that reply to!!!!!!!
--- Begin Message ---
Adam Spiers wrote:
>
> Ala Qumsieh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
snip
> > Which brings me to another question. In order to bring out the "Golf" in
> > "Perl Golf", should one of the courses involve a problem with a pre-defined
> > strategy that everyone has to follow? This would make everyone on par in
> > terms of their approach to the problem, and will highlight each person's
> > true golfing expertise.
>
> I don't like this idea. IMHO "true" golfing is about cunning syntax
> *and* getting the right algorithm, not just the former. Besides, it
> would make the holes a lot less interesting. There's only so much you
> can do with cunning syntax.
I agree with adam. In all the golfing on CLPM or whereever, there are a
few characters chopped here and there, then someone jumps in with a bit
of lateral thinking on the algorithm to drop 20 characters.. This is what
makes it so cool (perhaps not the right word).
How much fun would it be in a post-mortem to have only solutions varying
from
-l $a='-';$a=~s/./$& $&/g for1..pop;print$a (43)
to
s/./$& $&/gfor($/="-
")x pop;print (34)
Not too much fun. I find making up the algorithms the interesting part,
and the golfing thereof just plain frustrating.
Jasper
--
Hey sexy mama... wanna kill all humans?
--- End Message ---
