Well that's pretty obvious, since you don't understand the C language... It's not nonsense; it's a logical program, I understand it. The code is obfuscated though, and I don't understand the point in all of that.Jessica43999 said:That just looks like totall nonsence to me.
Obviously the guy who got it did.Who'd want THAT on their arm forever?
not to mention it will be blurred and merged by then.. it will either look like noodles or he will cover it up with a real tattoo, like a viking pirate lion monster.. with kanji !!!Jessica43999 said:That's gonna look sooo great when the guy's 80...
It appears that he has answered the questions about why.from the link said:This particular piece of code was the very first IOCCC entry received in the contest.
What significance does this tattoo have (to you)?
- The program was written in 1984, the year my family got our first computer (a Commodore Vic 20), when I was 7.
- The program was written in 1984, the title year of George Orwell's classic dystopian novel.
- The program is written in C, the first "high level" language I learned (on an Amiga).
- The program is in "obfuscated" code, that is, what it does is not readily apparent. This idea of hidden meaning appeals to me greatly. In addition it switches around read and write functions in a delightfully ambiguous fashion.
- The program is a version of "Hello, World", the first program people learn in most every language, as it was for me. Ever since a young age I have used this expression to test output from most of my programs and on websites and the like as a first post.
- The authorship of the code is a mystery or a "deathbed secret", adding an intrigue to the story surrounding it.
- The code ends in an emoticon AKA a smiley, ;} . Which I have been (over)using in writing ever since I first went online on BBSes in the early 90s.
- The second line has the lament, "o, world!".
There are contest for shitty code? Who would've thought...This particular piece of code was the very first IOCCC entry received in the contest.
i'm with you.. my original post of this included the smiley .. representing 'is this guy nuts?'junglizm said:I guess I could see how someone would think obfuscated code is clever, but for anyone other than a hobbyist, it's called bad code. And bad code, although sometimes clever, is never good.
Of course there are an equal, if not greater, amount of disadvantages.There are also programs known as obfuscators that may operate on source code, object code, or both, for the purpose of deterring reverse engineering.
Uses for obfuscation
Makes reverse engineering more difficult
- Even when a language is compiled to an executable or bytecode file, someone may choose to run a decompiler which converts these files back into human-readable form (generally without comments). This could help them understand whatever lies hidden within the source code, against the wishes of the code's creator. Obfuscation serves to increase the difficulty of decompilation, usually forcing someone who wants that information to use more costly forms of reverse engineering.
Minimizes code size
- Obfuscation usually breaks down structures which make programs modular and maintainable. This has the pleasant side-effect of reducing code size in many cases. For example, in dynamic languages that incorporate a symbol table with the executable code, simple variable renaming can save a great deal of space in the resulting code footprint. This is a crucial consideration if code size must be kept to a minimum, as with code that must be sent over a network or embedded into a small device.
Concealment of evidence