Write a Ruby program that prints out the numbers 1 to 100, one number
per line. The program must be less than 10 characters long.
Good luck!
Wyatt Greene
Lol whats this all about?
Well, just for the crack..
p *1..100
···
On Jan 30, 9:14 pm, Wyatt Greene <green...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Write a Ruby program that prints out the numbers 1 to 100, one number
per line. The program must be less than 10 characters long.Good luck!
Wyatt Greene
Wyatt Greene wrote:
Write a Ruby program that prints out the numbers 1 to 100, one number
per line. The program must be less than 10 characters long.
Does this have some kind of spoiler-period like the ruby quiz? Well, since it
didn't say so in the OP and anyone who wants to solve it on his own can just
not read the replies until he's done, here it goes:
p *1..100
or one char shorter:
p *1..?d
···
--
NP: Explosions in the Sky- With Tired Eyes, Tired Minds, Tired Souls, We Slept
Jabber: sepp2k@jabber.org
ICQ: 205544826
Wyatt Greene wrote:
Write a Ruby program that prints out the numbers 1 to 100, one number
per line. The program must be less than 10 characters long.Good luck!
Wyatt Greene
For more golf fun see: http://codegolf.com
···
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
p *1..100
Tadah!
I had to think about it for moment, though
···
On Jan 30, 2008, at 4:14 PM, Wyatt Greene wrote:
Write a Ruby program that prints out the numbers 1 to 100, one number
per line. The program must be less than 10 characters long.
I was thinking of p *1..100
I'm am truly amazed that this could be squeezed down even further to p
*1..?d
That leads me to wonder...is it possible to squeeze this program down
into 7 characters?
···
On Jan 30, 4:27 pm, Sebastian Hungerecker <sep...@googlemail.com> wrote:
Wyatt Greene wrote:
> Write a Ruby program that prints out the numbers 1 to 100, one number
> per line. The program must be less than 10 characters long.Does this have some kind of spoiler-period like the ruby quiz? Well, since it
didn't say so in the OP and anyone who wants to solve it on his own can just
not read the replies until he's done, here it goes:p *1..100
or one char shorter:
p *1..?d--
NP: Explosions in the Sky- With Tired Eyes, Tired Minds, Tired Souls, We Slept
Jabber: sep...@jabber.org
ICQ: 205544826
Would you be so gentle and explain this piece of code to me?
I know things like p "a"*10, but I dont really understand your code.
I know that 1..100 describes a range, but... isn't * a binary operator? I don't really see the first/second operand
···
On [Thu, 31.01.2008 06:24], Lee Jarvis wrote:
On Jan 30, 9:14 pm, Wyatt Greene <green...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Write a Ruby program that prints out the numbers 1 to 100, one number
> per line. The program must be less than 10 characters long.
>
> Good luck!
> Wyatt GreeneLol whats this all about?
Well, just for the crack..
p *1..100
--
Dominik Honnef
Dominik Honnef wrote:
> p *1..100
Would you be so gentle and explain this piece of code to me?
[...] isn't * a binary operator? I
* can be a binary operator, yes, but here it is the unary, prefix
splat-operator which takes an array or any object that responds to
to_a and turns it into a list of arguments:
foo(*[:la,:li,:lu]) becomes foo(:la,:li,:lu)
p *1..5 becomes p 1,2,3,4,5
HTH,
Sebastian
···
--
Jabber: sepp2k@jabber.org
ICQ: 205544826
This is the problem with writing "clever" code...it's unreadable!
The * operator used here is a unary operator that is used to convert
an array into a list of arguments. For example, say you had this
method:
def say(a, b, c)
puts a
puts b
puts c
end
If you had this array:
arr = [1, 2, 3]
As a convenience, Ruby lets you pass each element of the array as a
separate argument into the method by using the * operator:
say(*arr)
In the case of p *1..100, the trick seems to work for a range, too.
···
On Jan 30, 4:36 pm, Dominik Honnef <domini...@gmx.net> wrote:
On [Thu, 31.01.2008 06:24], Lee Jarvis wrote:
> On Jan 30, 9:14 pm, Wyatt Greene <green...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Write a Ruby program that prints out the numbers 1 to 100, one number
> > per line. The program must be less than 10 characters long.> > Good luck!
> > Wyatt Greene> Lol whats this all about?
> Well, just for the crack..
> p *1..100
Would you be so gentle and explain this piece of code to me?
I know things like p "a"*10, but I dont really understand your code.
I know that 1..100 describes a range, but... isn't * a binary operator? I don't really see the first/second operand--
Dominik Honnef
Looks like Sebastian Hungerecker explained it before I could get
there. At least I got my post in second before him, hehe..
Well said, Sebastian.
Regards,
Lee
···
On Jan 30, 9:36 pm, Dominik Honnef <domini...@gmx.net> wrote:
Would you be so gentle and explain this piece of code to me?
I know things like p "a"*10, but I dont really understand your code.
I know that 1..100 describes a range, but... isn't * a binary operator? I don't really see the first/second operand
Wyatt Greene wrote:
I was thinking of p *1..100
I'm am truly amazed that this could be squeezed down even further to p
*1..?dThat leads me to wonder...is it possible to squeeze this program down
into 7 characters?
I tried another approach by relaxing your conditions a bit : the number
must all be printed out on the output but not one on each line.
p 2**975
works 
ie the "output" verifies :
!(1..100).any? { |v| output !~ /#{v}/ }
Unfortunately there's no x**y solution to this condition where x and y
use less that 4 characters.
Still stuck with 8 chars :-/ I can't think of any other string or
numeric operator which can generate lots of data to print with little
input right now.
Lionel
I was thinking of p *1..100
I'm am truly amazed that this could be squeezed down even further to p
*1..?dThat leads me to wonder...is it possible to squeeze this program down
into 7 characters?
How about 0 characters?
ruby -p -e '' < numbers
The ruby program is zero characters. You just have to set up the
'numbers' file ahead of time.
Judson
···
On Jan 30, 2008 1:35 PM, Wyatt Greene <greenewm@yahoo.com> wrote:
--
Your subnet is currently 169.254.0.0/16. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Ah, yeah of course... I totally forgot about that.
If it had been puts(*[1,2,3...]) I wouldnt have asked that question 
Actually, I'm using this feature a lot in my codes. But didn't know it takes any object,
which responds to #to_a
Thank you
(Okay, I forgot, that puts can take multiple arguments, too. Sometimes, Ruby is just too easy)
···
On [Thu, 31.01.2008 06:42], Sebastian Hungerecker wrote:
Dominik Honnef wrote:
> > p *1..100
>
> Would you be so gentle and explain this piece of code to me?
> [...] isn't * a binary operator? I* can be a binary operator, yes, but here it is the unary, prefix
splat-operator which takes an array or any object that responds to
to_a and turns it into a list of arguments:
foo(*[:la,:li,:lu]) becomes foo(:la,:li,:lu)
p *1..5 becomes p 1,2,3,4,5HTH,
Sebastian
--
Jabber: sepp2k@jabber.org
ICQ: 205544826
--
Dominik Honnef
Wow, that's pretty creative, though!
···
On Jan 30, 6:01 pm, Lionel Bouton <lionel-subscript...@bouton.name> wrote:
Wyatt Greene wrote:
> I was thinking of p *1..100> I'm am truly amazed that this could be squeezed down even further to p
> *1..?d> That leads me to wonder...is it possible to squeeze this program down
> into 7 characters?I tried another approach by relaxing your conditions a bit : the number
must all be printed out on the output but not one on each line.p 2**975
works
ie the "output" verifies :
!(1..100).any? { |v| output !~ /#{v}/ }Unfortunately there's no x**y solution to this condition where x and y
use less that 4 characters.Still stuck with 8 chars :-/ I can't think of any other string or
numeric operator which can generate lots of data to print with little
input right now.Lionel