Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 12:00:55AM +0300, Markus Laire wrote:
>> And I'm definitely going to try any future PerlGolf challenges also
>> in perl6.
>
> Is it considered better if perl6 use more characters than perl5? (ie
> implying probably less line noise)
> or less (getting your job done more tersely?)
>From the bit of Perl6 information I've gathered from the Apocalypses, the
Exegesises (is that really the plural? Sounds horrible.), and my
perl6-language reading, I'd say Perl6 is not only going to be a bit more
verbose (unless you use the dreaded "use Perl5;" pragma ;) ), but it'll also
be a Good Thing.
Applying that to Perl Golf, however, isn't possible. It doesn't make sense
to ask whether less line noise is better in golf. Anybody who has seen any
of the winning solutions should realize that whoever wrote that either used
some random string generator or tried to do create ASCII art from a color
scan of bird droppings.
Maybe I am just a bit frustrated that I had such a hard time understanding
some of the solutions. :)
> It would be interesting to see whether there are classes of problems
> that go in different directions.
I guess over 90 percent of problems will be longer; possibly about 60
percent being significantly longer. (Mainly because of the changes of A5.)
Steffen
--
@n=(544290696690,305106661574,116357),$b=16,@c=' ,JPacehklnorstu'=~
/./g;for$n(@n){map{$h=int$n/$b**$_;$n-=$b**$_*$h;$c[@c]=$h}c(0..9);
push@p,map{$c[$_]}@c[c($b..$#c)];$#c=$b-1}print@p;sub'c{reverse @_}
