in reply to Better with warnings

The result is :deibyz you must do her duty of JAPH. .- Just Another Perl Hacker, Is wrong or It is ok???

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Better with warnings
by ktross (Deacon) on Apr 12, 2005 at 18:26 UTC
    cristian,
    It is not mandatory for the code posted in this section to be a JAPH. It often is, but some of the most interesting things here were completely different.

    Check out:
    Erudil's camel code and eyepopslikeamosquito's Saturn if you haven't already.

    All that's required is that the methodology of the script is not imeddiatly apparent to all. In short - simply obfuscated code.

      Yes understand. I not criticize the code , only questions the finaly the obfuscade code not search to outwit with Japh. For what outwit japh and where is the concept? My end not is to offend , is learn. Thanks ktros and deibyz for learn.
Re^2: Better with warnings
by deibyz (Hermit) on Apr 12, 2005 at 16:35 UTC
    Was intended as a signature. The "Just Another Perl Hack" is just to distract attention.
      Yes i undestend , but , ofuscated sections it based in japh? or signature? or simply ofuscated code.? The signature is good , where is the concept.