merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz) (04/02/91)
In article <1991Apr1.042852.4350@eng.umd.edu>, ziegast@eng (Eric W. Ziegast) writes: | It appears as though several posters are trying to out-perl others when | it comes to printing out the "standard" signature, | | Just another Perl hacker | | How about having a contest for the best Perl hack that will print the | "standard" perl signature? When run, such a hack should produce the same | results as: | | print "Just another Perl hacker"; | | "Best" is a relative term. A signature should at least be portable and | be as obscure as possible. Conciseness would be a plus. | | This is just a suggestion and not an open invitation for everyone to | post just their hacks. Perhaps someone could moderate enties by e-mail. | Is there a Perl guru out there able enough to judge the entries? I forget, having been around this list since its inception, that there are those that haven't seen most of the crazier ones, and hence don't know the folklore. (Tom, how about publishing your collection once again?) But for Eric's sake (and for anyone else that tuned in within the last nine months), the JAPHs originated as a convolution of my "Just another..." signatures on the net. (I use a different tag for each group, but generally always beginning with "Just another".) When I would suggest the use of Perl in the comp.unix.questions newsgroup, I modified it to be: print "Just another Perl hacker," figuring that even non Perl-speaking-people would figure out what that did. However, *within* the Perl group, I had a different audience, and got bored of saying it the same way all the time... so I started altering it with each new posting. Others joined in... most of them posting things so obscure that even I couldn't figure them out except to be delighted in running them and having the proper text come out. But the original idea for JAPHs is still mine. :-) My favorite is still the McDonald one, although the paper-tape decoder runs a close second. As for your suggestion of a contest, I won't stand in your way, but I'd have to disqualify myself as a participant. :-) [side note: Yes, I know... "The Book" doesn't have a collection of JAPHs... but you have to get *something* from the net, right? :-] print unpack("a8X5ax4a3X7ax6aX3a2xaX9ax3aX4ax7a2X6a2x4a","Just anoherPlck,") -- /=Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095 ==========\ | on contract to Intel's iWarp project, Beaverton, Oregon, USA, Sol III | | merlyn@iwarp.intel.com ...!any-MX-mailer-like-uunet!iwarp.intel.com!merlyn | \=Cute Quote: "Intel: putting the 'backward' in 'backward compatible'..."====/
rbj@uunet.UU.NET (Root Boy Jim) (04/02/91)
In article <1991Apr1.175858.23200@iwarp.intel.com> merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz) writes: ?In article <1991Apr1.042852.4350@eng.umd.edu>, ziegast@eng (Eric W. Ziegast) writes: ?| How about having a contest for the best Perl hack that will print the ?| "standard" perl signature? When run, such a hack should produce the same ?| results as: ?| ?| print "Just another Perl hacker"; ?| ?print unpack("a8X5ax4a3X7ax6aX3a2xaX9ax3aX4ax7a2X6a2x4a","Just anoherPlck,") One problem with these signatures is that quite a few of them can be reduced to mere subscript transposition. I suppose my best one to date starts by generating pi/4 (the base idea inspired by merlyn). $%{Just}=' another ';$%{perl}=' hacker,';print%%; -- [rbj@uunet 1] stty sane unknown mode: sane