| Rank | User | Size | Date | Code |
| 1 | Runer112 | 139 | 8/7/2014 11:54:17 PM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| 2 | JWinslow23 | 141 | 8/4/2014 4:34:15 PM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| Rank | User | Size | Date | Code |
| 1 | Juju | 98 | 8/4/2014 8:02:43 PM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| Rank | User | Size | Date | Code |
| 1 | bb010g | 68 | 8/8/2014 12:54:03 PM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| 2 | 3298 | 70 | 8/7/2014 6:55:04 AM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| Rank | User | Size | Date | Code |
| 1 | 3298 | 63.5 | 8/7/2014 9:07:43 AM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| Rank | User | Size | Date | Code |
| 1 | Runer112 | 137 (requires Java 8 ) | 8/10/2014 12:43:30 PM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| 2 | 3298 | 156 | 8/9/2014 5:14:28 AM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| Rank | User | Size | Date | Code |
| 1 | 3298 | 125 | 8/9/2014 5:14:28 AM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| Rank | User | Size | Date | Code |
| 1 | willrandship | 68 | 8/5/2014 7:50:40 PM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| Rank | User | Size | Date | Code |
| 1 | LDStudios | 105 | 8/10/2014 1:27:16 PM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| 2 | Adriweb | 107 (function body) | 8/10/2014 5:48:57 PM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| 3 | Jens_K | 115 | 8/9/2014 5:46:04 PM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| Rank | User | Size | Date | Code |
| 1 | Runer112 | 22 | 8/7/2014 11:54:17 PM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| Rank | User | Size | Date | Code |
| 1 | Runer112 | 22 | 8/7/2014 11:54:17 PM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| Rank | User | Size | Date | Code |
| 1 | Runer112 | 59 | 8/7/2014 11:54:17 PM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| Rank | User | Size | Date | Code |
| 1 | 3298 | 154 | 8/9/2014 5:14:18 AM | Spoiler For Spoiler: |
| Rank | Lang | User | Size | Date |
| 1 | CJam | Runer112 | 22 | 8/7/2014 11:54:17 PM |
| 2 | Golfscript | Runer112 | 22 | 8/7/2014 11:54:17 PM |
| 3 | TI-83+ z80 | Runer112 | 59 | 8/7/2014 11:54:17 PM |
| 4 | SysRPL | 3298 | 63.5 | 8/7/2014 9:07:43 AM |
| 5 | Perl | willrandship | 68 | 8/5/2014 7:50:40 PM |
| 6 | Haskell | bb010g | 68 | 8/8/2014 12:54:03 PM |
| 7 | Ruby2 | Juju | 98 | 8/4/2014 8:02:43 PM |
| 8 | NSpire Lua | LDStudios | 105 | 8/10/2014 1:27:16 PM |
| 9 | XTend | 3298 | 125 | 8/9/2014 5:14:28 AM |
| 10 | Java | Runer112 | 137 (requires Java 8 ) | 8/10/2014 12:43:30 PM |
| 11 | TI-83+ BASIC | Runer112 | 139 | 8/7/2014 11:54:17 PM |
| 12 | C | 3298 | 154 | 8/9/2014 5:14:18 AM |
You should stick Next/Previous links in each of these Contest posts.Well, I thought it would all derail by the end of Contest #2. :P I'll get right on that.
How the heck did you compress the Haskell code like that :crazy: ... nevermind, got 71 bytes now, assuming Unix-style line endings (with DOS-style 2-byte line endings it's 72). Take that!Actually, there are 2-byte tokens in TI-BASIC, and lots of them. That is part of the reason why we don't like lowercase letters. :P
Edit: Also cut down the SysRPL program size to 63.5. I don't expect to be able to compete with CJam and Golfscript, but at least SysRPL is useful for real problems. ;)
By the way, the compactness of that language comes from the fact that programs are usually stored in compiled form. Judging from the prime tester example in the post from the first round, TI-Basic does something similar, though (it seems commands take 1 byte each, instead of 1 byte per character in their names), so I don't feel bad for telling you the compiled size instead of the much larger source size. I know Casio-Basic does those 1-byte commands as well, but because string manipulation is not present in the Casio-Basic version on my calcs, I cannot submit a Casio-Basic entry. (String manipulation was introduced in OS 2.00 for the 9860 series.)
How the heck did you compress the Haskell code like that :crazy: ... nevermind, got 71 bytes now, assuming Unix-style line endings (with DOS-style 2-byte line endings it's 72). Take that!DAAAAAAAAAANG.
Edit: Also cut down the SysRPL program size to 63.5. I don't expect to be able to compete with CJam and Golfscript, but at least SysRPL is useful for real problems. ;)
Actually, there are 2-byte tokens in TI-BASIC, and lots of them. That is part of the reason why we don't like lowercase letters. :PYes, of course, there's more than 256 commands, so 2-byte tokens are necessary. Casio does the same, by the way, On my old calculators there were 2 categories of 2-byte tokens (each beginning with its own prefix byte), later calculators, such as the 9860 series, expanded that. The 9860 series somewhen (I think it was also with OS 2.00) also introduced lowercase letters, and guess what? they use 2-byte tokens, >:( I noticed that when I got a program including these sent to my 9750 from a 9860. All lowercase letters were converted to sequences of two tokens each because they used a prefix which wasn't present in the old calcs.
Looks like things are getting pretty heated in the Haskell category! 3298 and bb010g are slashing bytes like crazy! Only thing to wonder now is, when will they stop? (And will it be before the competition's over?)This could be the end, considering that we have the same score now. Maybe we hit the global optimum. ;)
70 bytes. ;DQuote from: JWinslow23Looks like things are getting pretty heated in the Haskell category! 3298 and bb010g are slashing bytes like crazy! Only thing to wonder now is, when will they stop? (And will it be before the competition's over?)This could be the end, considering that we have the same score now. Maybe we hit the global optimum. ;)
Edit: Just because I can, I made an x86 ASM version. I didn't expect it to become small, and it's much bigger than anything mentioned here. :/ Oh well, it's not a suitable language for Code Golf. I'm not submitting it, so if you want to see the source, ask me.Why not submit it? It's an entry, even if the language is verbose.
I use just the Unix sys_write and sys_exit calls, no trickery with the C standard library. It compiles to 838 bytes, and after treating it with strip, it's at 444. The source is 516 bytes long, but I could get rid of some formatting to get that down to 465, maybe even further.
IOCCC, anyone? :PWell yes. (http://www.omnimaga.org/other-calculator-discussion-and-news/the-omnimaga-obfuscated-code-contest-(oocc)/)
Well, it shouldn't matter as long as it is a correct output.IOCCC, anyone? :PWell yes. (http://www.omnimaga.org/other-calculator-discussion-and-news/the-omnimaga-obfuscated-code-contest-(oocc)/)
Also my output is surroundered by double quotes and JWin don't seem to care.
Well, I could remove the _ in mapM_ if some garbage looking like [(),(),(),()] below the output is okay. But other than that, I ran out of ideas.That should be fine; I did so. That last byte is a killer, though.
In other news, I reduced my Java program size by 4 bytes, so I claim the first place in that category again. :P The XTend entry is also reduced by 7 bytes. And finally there is a new C entry with 154 bytes.
I did. Did you see the size change? :PWell, I could remove the _ in mapM_ if some garbage looking like [(),(),(),()] below the output is okay. But other than that, I ran out of ideas.That should be fine; I did so. That last byte is a killer, though.
In other news, I reduced my Java program size by 4 bytes, so I claim the first place in that category again. :P The XTend entry is also reduced by 7 bytes. And finally there is a new C entry with 154 bytes.
/me pokes JWinlow23 to remove the underscore from 3298's answer
/me derpsI did. Did you see the size change? :PWell, I could remove the _ in mapM_ if some garbage looking like [(),(),(),()] below the output is okay. But other than that, I ran out of ideas.That should be fine; I did so. That last byte is a killer, though.
In other news, I reduced my Java program size by 4 bytes, so I claim the first place in that category again. :P The XTend entry is also reduced by 7 bytes. And finally there is a new C entry with 154 bytes.
/me pokes JWinlow23 to remove the underscore from 3298's answer
Jens_K has finally submitted, bringing the score on Nspire Lua from 122 to 115! Can LDStudios do any better?I'm down to 118 bytes.. we'll see
got a 113 chars in Lua ^^
But you do it char by char so it's not the same :P
Anyway, your way, I got a bit more than you so I won't submit it ^^
Also, made one in C that's 143 chars + length of input string.
I got 93 by doing it char by char ^^
Not sure if I am after deadline though...
Well I was too late... Anyways, heres my code:I got 93 by doing it char by char ^^
Not sure if I am after deadline though...
How? O.O
n=0
function on.charIn(c)n=n+(tonumber(c)and-c or c:byte())..""print((n:gsub(".","%1\n")))end
You should move the deadline to 11:59 PM instead of 12 AM, because from experience when I organized Omnimaga contests, even experienced programmers and TI community veterans would mix up 12 AM with 12 PM and it was even more confusing for people living in different timezones.It's 1:00 AM EST. It's a simple lookup online.
Rule clarification: We measure by the amount of characters it takes. Link to character counter: http://mothereff.in/byte-counter (http://mothereff.in/byte-counter)But but but more space for assignments and disadvantage to those on restricted charsets. (Also, Haskell extensions like -XUnicodeSyntax) What's wrong with byte count? I can't think of a language that requires Unicode to use a feature.
I can't think of a language that requires Unicode to use a feature.HP PPL? :trollface:
Not really. You can use ASCII substitutions. In any case, you aren't saving bytes by using multi-byte Unicode characters instead of normal multi-byte character sequences.I can't think of a language that requires Unicode to use a feature.HP PPL? :trollface:
Byte, char, same thing when multi-byte-characters are not present in most of the computer lang entries.Not really. You can use ASCII substitutions. In any case, you aren't saving bytes by using multi-byte Unicode characters instead of normal multi-byte character sequences.I can't think of a language that requires Unicode to use a feature.HP PPL? :trollface: