Perl Poetry Contest 48
Weeden writes "Leafing through the latest issue of The Perl Journal I came accross the Perl Poetry Contest. The deadline is the 20th of February and all the details can be found here. "
Our business in life is not to succeed but to continue to fail in high spirits. -- Robert Louis Stevenson
Re:Rhyming programs - other languages (Score:1)
RIchy C.
--
Keeping that artistry alive (Score:1)
I once did a 1970s version of this - Cobol in rhyming couplets. Just about feasible, but your iambic pentameter goes out of the window.
You get a flat forehead as well.
Re:Rhyming programs - other languages (Score:1)
RIchy C.
--
Programming Poetry (Score:2)
I've been trying to write Perl Poems off and on since 1996. I'm trying to write code that functions not only as a poem, but as useful code. That's not as easy as it sounds. I'm definitely going to enter the competition this year. (If they're planning to do this next year, I'll definitely be entering then, too, but with some more sophisticated.)
As for writing poetry in other programming languages, I have written some Lisp code that I thought was a bit poetic (though by accident) and quite beautiful to look at. I've not tried this in C or C++, but that might be fun, too.
Contrary to some other opinions expressed here, I don't think writing poetry in a programming language is a waste of time, particularly if the object is to write a poem and not hold it up as an example of good coding practice! I view programming more as an art than a science anyway. Yeah, there's abstract Computer Science with all it's attendant math and theories, then there's the actual ART of programming which EXPRESSES those theories in a LANGUAGE.
Don't be swayed to the dark side... (Score:3)
prhine: Advanced Perl Programming is a welcome mat on the Dark Path(tm)
prhine: D'you know anything about JavaPerl? As in how they combine the two?
Colin: Well. Imagine that Java is a dainty, well-dressed Victorian lady. And Perl is a big, grimy 10th century viking with a hard-on. JavaPerl is like a small room with a bed.
Re:Beauty in the eye of the beholder ? (Score:2)
Eh ? There was me thinking the Church-Turing Theorem held. Obfuscated code doesn't have to be complex functionaly (just look at some of the hello world contenders in the IOCC) they have to be complex to de-crypt into a quickly understandable form. The functionality has very little to do with the obfuscation.
A well written set of libraries for 3d graphics will in fact be very easy to understand from a code perspective, it is the functionality that is the tough bit to grasp. Obfuscated code is very different from complex functionality. Look at some of the code in the Linux kernel, wonderfully written, and if you understand the functionality you can modify it yourself, if you don't have a clue what it is trying to do its comparable to russian, this doesn't mean the code is obfuscated, but that the functionality is difficult.
Difficult code should be difficult to understand because of the functionality it implements not because someone couldn't be arsed to comment it, use sensible names and wanted 40,000 lines to run in one method with gotos.
Obfuscation is the other end of the scale, its code that is made difficult in and of itself, the difficulty of the functionality is only found after the code has been translated.
Re:poetry magnets (Score:1)
Rhyming programs - other languages (Score:1)
RIchy C.
--
Re:We need a tougher competition (Score:1)
I learned about most of how JPG files are formatted. Its a shame I didn't really speak the language, so I still don't quite see how the huffman tree is represented in the file.
Mp3 should be possible as long as 100% compatibility wasn't required. I've heard that there's a lot of legacy code in there.
Re:We need a tougher competition (Score:1)
Go Harl Go! (Score:2)
The Odyssey (Score:1)
Re:Beauty in the eye of the beholder ? (Score:1)
That is beautiful code, code that allows you to understand functionality, ideally it should teach you the functionality but most importantly it should never hinder you.
So ladies and gentlemen, use long names, use lots of comparmentalised objects, use many methods on those objects. Don't require callers to understand the internals of methods.
And remember 99% of the time the compiler writer will do a better job of optimising the code than you.
Re:We need a tougher competition (Score:1)
Ryan
Re:Beauty in the eye of the beholder ? (Score:1)
Ryan
Re:Beauty in the eye of the beholder ? (Score:1)
Good coding? Sez who? (Score:1)
This is just a creative hobby, not good coding.
Also, I don't think that a perl poem excludes readability as code. Although I don't think the average perl poem is the MOST readable way to do things, if you read it as code rather than as a poem you should be able to get it. Of course, most perl poems toss around extra variables, etc, to add those extra words in, so that would take some figuring out.
free time (Score:1)
Sorry couldn't resist.
Beauty in the eye of the beholder ? (Score:2)
Okay I know I'm just a kill-joy but the reason the obfuscation competitions are so good is that they make the point against obfuscation so well, this competition appears to be pushing this as a beautiful way to code. Code is beautiful in and of itself, it is its structure that lends beauty and its simplicity that defines genius. Code as poetry is ugly as code, even if it is beautiful as poetry.
Re:?Perl? (Score:1)
beowulf (Score:3)
sparkes
it was ment to be funny so don't hit my karma for not being a coward.
*** www.linuxuk.co.uk relaunches 1 Mar 2000 ***
poetry magnets (Score:1)
We need a tougher competition (Score:2)
And also looks nice.
And is also a functioning program in more than one language.
And can b typd on a kyboard with no e's
This is sick and twisted. (Score:1)
These people obviously have way too much time on their hands.
I have just tried to dash something out and realized just how hard this is. Anyone who can do this really is a poet. It would take a few days to even make a halfway decent haiku.
Re:Rhyming programs - other languages (Score:1)
Spills its source onto the screen
You get what you had
Easiest Quine is:
Using error as code, thus
getting error back
Postin Perl (Score:5)
#
# Postin.pl
# by 348
seek topost (thatflamebait);
Firstpost (the thread, fast);
while ($natalie) {
petrifies $to($stone);
not grits;
}
accept the, moderation;
seek the, $-1Troll, $-1offtopic'
and wait;
stat thekarma;
unlink and listen (for, $theflames);
for (a, karmawhore our /.) {
system ("is trollheaven");
Re:Beauty in the eye of the beholder ? (Score:3)
Also, I think you don't understand the nature of true obfuscation. A truly obfuscated program cannot be translated into code that the average programmer can understand. Ever. Good examples are compression programs, 3d graphics, and simulations. Go read the source to an mp3 codec and ask yourself, "Do I have any idea what the tonality function does?" Even after reading that function 10 times you probably won't.
Understanding a truly obfuscated program will probably require the purchasing of several textbooks.
Ryan
Re:poetry magnets (Score:1)
From the article: "Choosing the prizes was easy. Winners will receive Magnetic Perl Poetry Kits from Perltoys.com"
--
Re:Beauty in the eye of the beholder ? (Score:1)
I have to disagree with you here. Anyone can write code that is easy to understand if it's just doing basic stuff. A talented programmer can write complex code thats just as easy to unserstand. I think it really depends on the style the programmer uses. Some people will choose a super slick convoluted algorithm to show their brilliance when a simple solution would work just as well and actually be maintainable. Whenever the speed of an application is not critical, simple, functional, readable code should always be a high priority.
I think I relate this to some of the real challenging classes I had in school. Some of my profs made no sense at all when thay explained stuff, while the real good profs could take a complex high level idea and break it down to something that made the light bulb go on in my head with a "Oh yeah... now I get it!"
Re:poem (Score:1)
Proof code is free speech (Score:3)
Re:Coding limericks, yes! (Score:1)
Who interpreted whenever he can.
He said about Perl,
Don't calculate Curl!
That's why we still use Fortran.
A hacker who coded in COBOL
was snubbed by his friend who did no BOL:
"But don't you see, HAL,
it's all OOP now!"
...and promptly got hit by a SNOBOL.
Thanks, this has potential!
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].
Re:We need a tougher competition (Score:1)
BTW, these numbers are completely realistic if you use gzip to do the final lossless compression.
Ryan
Re:We need a tougher competition (Score:1)
"Your village called THEIR idiot is missing"
-Trout
Poet Laureate? (Score:1)
Re:Beauty in the eye of the beholder ? (Score:1)
Who is always programming in Perl
If he was a man
He'd use just Fortran
In fact I think he's a girl.
Printing your own code (Score:1)
What? like this C64 program: