Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The 20th IOCCC Winners Announced

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the using-only-seven-bytes dept.

Programming 34

An anonymous reader writes "The 20th International Obfuscated C Code Contest ended on February 5th, 2012, and the list of winners has been announced. According to the page, the source code for all the winning entries 'has not been released yet.' It will be available alongside code from previous years 'in late-February to mid-March.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I feel like... (1)

garrettg84 (1826802) | more than 2 years ago | (#38958399)

I feel like winning this could put you on the no fly list or some of the other terrorism related lists.....or get you a job....

Re:I feel like... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38958565)

Two things that no-life people don't do, so if you end up on that list you're fairly sure of that not happening.

Re:I feel like... (4, Funny)

91degrees (207121) | more than 2 years ago | (#38964509)

.or get you a job....

Well, pretty certain I've worked with the winner of this.

IOCCC... (5, Funny)

Okomokochoko (1490679) | more than 2 years ago | (#38958557)

Promoting only the finest in unreadable code since 1984.

Re:IOCCC... (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#38958567)

Now now, I think the empty string program was highly readable: it did exactly what it said it did.

Re:IOCCC... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38958747)

Only the period 1984-1987. Then Larry Wall took over.

Re:IOCCC... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38962467)

It took me a good while to figure out your joke. After all, Larry Wall only won twice, and those were in 1986 and 1987.

They could make the contest title more musical... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38958737)

They could make the contest title more musical by calling it "Rube Goldberg in C".

Re:They could make the contest title more musical. (1)

trum4n (982031) | more than 2 years ago | (#38960081)

That would obfuscate the mission and message of the competition, and that is clearly not the goal here.

I love love love this! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38958751)

I could stare at and examine winning entries for days on end. I really love this competition.

Re:I love love love this! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38959625)

I have decided to work out what some of these do. Firstly for the intellectual challenge, and secondly to give me a deeper insight into the language.

A pity the entries are not available yet (1)

youn (1516637) | more than 2 years ago | (#38958797)

still love ioccc! glad it is back

Re:A pity the entries are not available yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38958909)

I wondered if "Aproximate grep" was an intentional pun, but then I saw "Margritte tribute".

"Ceci n'est pas un programme"?

It's all obfuscated if you're doing it right (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38959097)

Programming used to be fun! Now everything is objects and bloated runtime systems.

Perl (1)

needs2bfree (1256494) | more than 2 years ago | (#38959525)

I wonder what obfuscated perl would look like...

Re:Perl (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38959563)

As it turns out, it's actually more readable than non-obfuscated perl.

This is coming from a perl lover :)

Re:Perl (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38959591)

And you didn't search that phrase?

Re:Perl (3, Funny)

Abreu (173023) | more than 2 years ago | (#38959689)

I wonder what obfuscated perl would look like...

Slashcode? [ducks!]

Re:Perl (1)

DMUTPeregrine (612791) | more than 2 years ago | (#38960313)

It would look like "Enterprise" anything.

Re:Perl (1)

c++0xFF (1758032) | more than 2 years ago | (#38960323)

/dev/urandom

Re:Perl (1)

ledow (319597) | more than 2 years ago | (#38960525)

Perl.

What's the point?.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38959575)

Other than flexing your geek. If you are writing code that looks anything like this in a team environment you'll be fired in a week.

Re:What's the point?.... (4, Insightful)

semi-extrinsic (1997002) | more than 2 years ago | (#38959865)

What's the point of NASCAR? If you drive like that in traffic, you'll be pulled over in a heartbeat.
(This is my first car analogy on /. Yay!)

Re:What's the point?.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38960659)

>What's the point of NASCAR?

I read your post, but I'm still not really sure what the point of NASCAR is.

Re:What's the point?.... (0)

semi-extrinsic (1997002) | more than 2 years ago | (#38964227)

Watch the latest episode of Top Gear. They manage to convince even the British that NASCAR is a good idea (or at least good entertainment).

Re:What's the point?.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38961357)

Ya, driving pointlessly in circles will certainly get you pulled over.

I'm gon turn left, den go straight, den turn left agin. Uh yup.

Re:What's the point?.... (4, Insightful)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 2 years ago | (#38960885)

Other than flexing your geek.

Deliberately writing obfuscated code can make you a better coder; you can look at the tricks you're using to make it hard to read and think "I have to make sure never to do anything like that in production code." One of the most valuable programming exercises I ever did, suggested as an "on your own time" project by one of my CS professors, was to write some short but moderately functional program (I think I did a scheduling simulator) without comments and with one-letter variable names, and then look at it again a few months later to see if it made sense. The answer: no, it didn't, and I considered the couple of hours I put into it to be time well-spent.

If you are writing code that looks anything like this in a team environment you'll be fired in a week.

Ah, idealism! Such a beautiful thing. Hold onto that for as long as you can, before the cruel world shatters your illusions.

real obfuscation (4, Insightful)

lucm (889690) | more than 2 years ago | (#38960017)

The best way to get real code obfuscation is to outsource VB.Net development to a third-world country. Seeing indexed property calls and casting in lambda expressions in VB.Net is already unsettling, but when the variable names are in a foreign language (or event better: foreign language in all uppercase) it is a treat, especially with random patches of On-Error-Gotos and line numbering.

Re:real obfuscation (1)

cerberusss (660701) | more than 2 years ago | (#38972409)

The best way to get real code obfuscation is to outsource VB.Net development to a third-world country. Seeing indexed property calls and casting in lambda expressions in VB.Net is already unsettling, but when the variable names are in a foreign language (or event better: foreign language in all uppercase) it is a treat, especially with random patches of On-Error-Gotos and line numbering.

Add some random copy/pasting, plenty of unused, undocumented variables, and best of all: a home-brew database structure that is further from normalized than most women.

Phobos-Grunt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38961261)

BREAKING: The Judges for the 20th International Obfuscated C Code Contest decided to award an honorary mention to the Phobos-Grunt programming team [slashdot.org] .

BREAKING BREAKING: IOCCC Judges retract honorary mention after reading TFA [planetary.org] ; particularly

Thankfully, this obfuscation turned out to be noise, and the actual failure report issued last week by the Russian space agency (Roscosmos) makes it clear that the fault lies at home -- due to non-space qualified parts being used in some of the electronics circuits.

No entries after 2006? (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 2 years ago | (#38962249)

I know I've seen yearly blurbs for IOCCC here on Slashdot. Why haven't they published source for winners from after 2006?

Re:No entries after 2006? (4, Informative)

machine321 (458769) | more than 2 years ago | (#38963109)

This was the 20th IOCCC. The 19th was in 2006.

As far as I`m concerned... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38963929)

all high-level languages are nothing more than obfuscated machine code.

No Code Available (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967747)

"It will be available alongside code from previous years 'in late-February to mid-March."

So, maybe we could've just waited until then before posting about it?

Sigh.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?