git mv *.hint -> README.md
There is one exception:
$ find . -name '*.hint' -execdir git mv '{}' README.md \;
git statufatal: destination exists, source=1992/albert/albert.hint, destination=1992/albert/README.md
Looking at the two files they differ quite a bit so I've not changed it.
I'll bring this up on GitHub.
This commit is contained in:
1 parent
046692c03e
commit
17ea7fbd9e
155 files changed
No files matched your search
@@ -0,0 +1,333 @@
|
||||
Astronomically Obfuscated:
|
||||
|
||||
James Bonfield
|
||||
MRC Laboratory of Molcular Biology
|
||||
Hills Road,
|
||||
Cambridge
|
||||
CB2 2QH
|
||||
England
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Judges' Comments:
|
||||
|
||||
To build:
|
||||
|
||||
make rince
|
||||
|
||||
To run (using an X windows server):
|
||||
|
||||
./rince
|
||||
|
||||
Also try:
|
||||
|
||||
make dmy2jd
|
||||
./rince 0.001 `./dmy2jd 7.8 1 1610`
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
This program may have you going around in circles :-) Try running it
|
||||
first before reading the Selected Author's Comments below.
|
||||
|
||||
The judges verified the correctness of output for recent dates
|
||||
thru visual observation.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Selected Author's Comments:
|
||||
|
||||
How to use it
|
||||
-------------
|
||||
|
||||
The simplest way to run it is with no arguments. Just type:
|
||||
|
||||
./rince
|
||||
|
||||
You will need to have access to X windows, although it doesn't require
|
||||
desperately high resolution and there are no known limitations on colour
|
||||
depth.
|
||||
|
||||
The display will change slowly over time, although it may take 10 minutes
|
||||
or more to be visible. For those that cannot wait that long the program
|
||||
has a built in time machine. Indeed the program knows the speed of light,
|
||||
which is used to ensure that we see the "live" pictures. Simply specify
|
||||
the fraction of a day to skip forward for each screen refresh. I suggest:
|
||||
|
||||
./rince 0.01
|
||||
|
||||
To display the output (still guessing?) for a given date, specify two
|
||||
arguments. The first argument is as before and the second argument is a
|
||||
Julian day number (given as a fractional component). Eg:
|
||||
|
||||
./rince 0 2441193.6
|
||||
./rince 0.01 2441193.6
|
||||
|
||||
A Julian day is defined to be the number of days since January 1st in
|
||||
the year -4712 (4713BC), starting at 12 noon GMT.[1] To aid conversion
|
||||
from our time (GMT) to Julian day there is a supplementary program
|
||||
named: dmy2jd.c. Run it with "day_float month year" as arguments. See
|
||||
below for an example.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
What it does
|
||||
------------
|
||||
|
||||
This program plots the positions of the four Galilean moons of Jupiter,
|
||||
as seen from earth. It doesn't correct for your location on earth, but I
|
||||
assure you that the parallax is minimal!
|
||||
|
||||
The moons are labelled with roman numerals from I to IV. I being the
|
||||
closest to the planet and IV being the furthest. They are:
|
||||
|
||||
I Io
|
||||
II Europa
|
||||
III Ganymede
|
||||
IV Callisto
|
||||
|
||||
Amazingly, all it takes is a pair of binoculars to see the Galilean moons,
|
||||
so the results can be experimentally checked. (Note that at present, the
|
||||
best views of Jupiter are over the autumn/winter.)
|
||||
|
||||
The positions of the moons should be correct for binoculars, but possibly
|
||||
not if you have a telescope or if you are in the southern hemisphere. In
|
||||
that case I suggest that to get the correct image you look at the screen
|
||||
from inside the monitor whilst standing on your head. In case of
|
||||
confusion, please consult the following chart (*):
|
||||
|
||||
N
|
||||
^
|
||||
|
|
||||
E <---+---> W
|
||||
|
|
||||
v
|
||||
S
|
||||
|
||||
(*) Not to scale.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
History
|
||||
-------
|
||||
|
||||
Galileo discovered the moons in January 1610.
|
||||
"http://www-isds.jpl.nasa.gov/cwo/cwo_54ga/html/cd/galileo.htm" states
|
||||
the following:
|
||||
|
||||
By early 1610, Galileo had further improved his telescope by
|
||||
double its power, so it now enlarged objects a thousand
|
||||
times. He began looking at the stars and couldn't believe how
|
||||
many more he could now see! The number seemed infinite. He was
|
||||
beginning to realize the fixed stars weren't a flat distant
|
||||
wall on a globe, but a three-dimensional expanse bigger than
|
||||
anyone had ever thought!
|
||||
|
||||
Then, on January 7, about an hour after sunset, Jupiter rose
|
||||
in the east, and Galileo happened to turn his powerful scope
|
||||
on its bright disk. It wasn't the first time he had looked at
|
||||
Jupiter, but before it was with one of his lesser-powered
|
||||
telescopes. This time, though, he noticed three small but
|
||||
bright stars near the planet, two to one side and one to the
|
||||
other. He wondered at how bright the small stars were and how
|
||||
they were arranged in what seemed like a straight line. The
|
||||
next night he decided to look at Jupiter again, and to his
|
||||
surprise, the stars had moved. But not in such a way as he
|
||||
would expect. If Jupiter was moving as it normally should, the
|
||||
stars would be east of Jupiter. But all three were to the
|
||||
west! The next night was cloudy, but on January 10, Galileo
|
||||
was able to observe the planet again. One of the stars was
|
||||
gone, and the other two were now on the east side. As the
|
||||
stars moved around Jupiter on each succeeding night, and were
|
||||
finally joined by a fourth star, it dawned on Galileo that
|
||||
what he had found were moons orbiting Jupiter! Almost at once
|
||||
he realized that this was proof that not all objects orbited
|
||||
the Earth. Here were four bodies that were orbiting
|
||||
Jupiter. One argument against the sun-centered theory was, if
|
||||
the Earth orbited the sun, wouldn't the moon get left behind?
|
||||
Here he could see for himself that somehow, a planet could
|
||||
orbit the sun, and not leave a moon behind!
|
||||
|
||||
Thus we can plot Galileo's discoveries using the following three plots:
|
||||
|
||||
./rince 0 `./dmy2jd 7.8 1 1610`
|
||||
./rince 0 `./dmy2jd 8.8 1 1610`
|
||||
./rince 0 `./dmy2jd 10.8 1 1610`
|
||||
|
||||
However we can go one better by seeing what Galileo would have seen if it
|
||||
wasn't cloudy on the 9th. Try "./rince 0 `./dmy2jd 9.85 1 1610`" to see
|
||||
what he was missing out on. I wonder what he'd have made of that!
|
||||
|
||||
Galileo discovered the fourth moon a few days later.
|
||||
|
||||
I've tried typing these dates in to two Java based Jovian moon plotters,
|
||||
but both I tried had problems dealing with dates earlier than 1900. More
|
||||
professional software, such as the SkyMap program [3] gets these values
|
||||
correct and this compares well with the above description and with this
|
||||
IOCCC entry.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
The year 4713BC was chosen by Joseph Justus Scaliger in the 16th Century,
|
||||
so clearly this program has a long history :-) A more complete description
|
||||
of the origins of Julian Days can be found at:
|
||||
|
||||
http://aa.usno.navy.mil/AA/faq/docs/millennium.html
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Assumptions
|
||||
-----------
|
||||
|
||||
1. The ASCII character set is used.
|
||||
|
||||
2. That an enormous comet hasn't changed the course of Jupiter (or Earth!).
|
||||
|
||||
3. That the date has not been specified as the gap between the Julian
|
||||
and Gregorian calendar.
|
||||
|
||||
4. That the DISPLAY environment variable is set and the X display can
|
||||
opened. If this is not the case the program will crash.
|
||||
|
||||
5. There is a year 2000BC problem :-)
|
||||
More specifically, the plots for dates that far back are too inaccurate
|
||||
to be of realistic use. Comparisons against SkyMap Pro [3] show that
|
||||
there is a good similarity (but not much more) up to about 500BC.
|
||||
|
||||
6. The code definitely is not portable - it will produce incorrect results
|
||||
if run from the surface of Mars.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Obfuscations
|
||||
------------
|
||||
|
||||
In addition to the normal obfuscations, I feel that the code contains
|
||||
some less common tricks. Taken through the standard rounds listed in the
|
||||
guidelines, the code attempts to pass these as follows:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Look at the original source
|
||||
|
||||
With luck, pure casual inspection should not reveal much except
|
||||
that the program contains the X Windows logo (a big clue) and
|
||||
contains a date. This date may give a clue to a few people that
|
||||
this is an astronomical program.
|
||||
|
||||
Unfortunately I was stretched for space which meant that the
|
||||
large string constant could not be split up using a "partA"
|
||||
"partB" method which clearly limits the code layout. However the
|
||||
space saved by using a single long string constant is more than
|
||||
outweighed by ability to further obfuscate.
|
||||
|
||||
2. convert ANSI tri-graphs to ASCII
|
||||
|
||||
These are not used.
|
||||
|
||||
3. C pre-process the source ignoring #include lines
|
||||
4. C pre-process the source ignoring #define and #include lines
|
||||
|
||||
This does a good job of expanding out the code, but it does not
|
||||
clarify things greatly. The use of #defines has been restricted
|
||||
primarily to a space-saving mechanism.
|
||||
|
||||
Additionally, the use of typedefs means that the types used are
|
||||
still obscured unless further replacement edits are made.
|
||||
|
||||
5. Run it through a C beautifier.
|
||||
|
||||
GNU indent seems to do a reasonable job, provided that the
|
||||
#defines are expanded first. This doesn't lay the algorithm
|
||||
particularly bare though as most of the obfuscations are not
|
||||
simple code layouts.
|
||||
|
||||
6. Examine the algorithm.
|
||||
|
||||
The algorithm operates on two levels. The main visible level is
|
||||
by taking a large string and breaking this down into a series of
|
||||
op-codes (which I have termed J-code). These are then executed.
|
||||
|
||||
To get to the real method of how it works, you need to decode
|
||||
the op-code string (which deliberately contains as many ; { and
|
||||
} symbols as possible), which will give you a reverse-polish
|
||||
notation chunk of mathematics.
|
||||
|
||||
Sensible people amongst you will simply refer to the referenced
|
||||
book :-)
|
||||
|
||||
7. Lint it.
|
||||
|
||||
I no longer have lint, although I do have access to Purify. I'm
|
||||
happy to say that purify does not detect any memory errors or
|
||||
memory leaks.
|
||||
|
||||
See below for compilation warnings.
|
||||
|
||||
8. Compile it.
|
||||
|
||||
I'm sorry to say that there are several warnings issued by the
|
||||
compiler.
|
||||
|
||||
Firstly, the return type for X() is not specified, so it
|
||||
defaults to int. Horror of all horrors - this function does not
|
||||
return an integer type (it doesn't contain any specific
|
||||
returns). The return value from X() is not accessed. The same
|
||||
problem occurs in main - it does not return. However main never
|
||||
exits unless there is a serious error.
|
||||
|
||||
The 6th argument of XDrawText (which should be XTextItem) is
|
||||
passed as a compatible structure, but without casting. This is
|
||||
to reduce code space. A more elegant solution is to remove the
|
||||
"struct {...} Z" completely and use "XTextItem
|
||||
f={i-127+r/3*2,r%3+r/3+1,0,E}" at the start of XDrawText
|
||||
block. Although this is accepted by several compilers, it is not
|
||||
strict ANSI due to the non-constant initialisers. A pity.
|
||||
|
||||
Note that I make use of usleep(). This is a POSIX call (it is
|
||||
BSD), but it supported on many systems. It may be implemented
|
||||
using select() or poll() if required, or as a final solution you
|
||||
may change the usleep(10000) to sleep(1). To compile on systems
|
||||
which do not have usleep, but do have select, the following may
|
||||
suffice as an additional compiler argument:
|
||||
|
||||
-Dusleep={time_t v[2]={0,10000};select(0,0,0,0,v);}
|
||||
|
||||
Gcc complains about "unreachable code at beginning of switch
|
||||
statement", although removing some of this code will prevent
|
||||
the algorithm from working.
|
||||
|
||||
Gcc also suggests that I should be using extra parenthesis, but
|
||||
I'm taking this as good comment :-)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
In addition to the above, the program has the following useful(?)
|
||||
obfuscations:
|
||||
|
||||
1. The algorithm requires many floating point numbers (about
|
||||
50). These are encoded as ASCII.
|
||||
|
||||
2. The J-code algorithm has op-codes designed to be space
|
||||
saving. They are all one byte, but many are also considered as
|
||||
white-space by the rules. This algorithm forms part of the same
|
||||
string that the floating point constants are embedded
|
||||
within. What does the ";" command do in J-code?
|
||||
|
||||
3. The J-code language is both stack based and variable based. This
|
||||
"uncleanliness" is not ideal from a computer science angle, but
|
||||
when has cleanliness been considered as good in IOCCC? :-)
|
||||
|
||||
4. Association of unconnected data by implied function usage. Eg
|
||||
use of strlen() and sizeof() simply to return useful numerical
|
||||
values, using irrelevant arguments.
|
||||
|
||||
5. As we already have a dependency on ASCII this has been abused
|
||||
further. Specifically some integer constants are specified as
|
||||
ASCII and some ASCII constants are integers. This hides the true
|
||||
meaning for the values.
|
||||
|
||||
6. Red herrings: there's a couple of pieces of code whose
|
||||
appearance is just there to mislead the unfirm of mind.
|
||||
I've only tried to include such examples in places where at
|
||||
first glance the code appears to be executed.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
----------
|
||||
[1] Astronomical algorithms (1st ed): page 59
|
||||
Jean Meeus. Published by Willmann-Bell Inc.
|
||||
|
||||
[2] Astronomical algorithms (1st ed): pages 285-299.
|
||||
Jean Meeus. Published by Willmann-Bell Inc.
|
||||
|
||||
[3] Skymap Pro, by Chris Marriott
|
||||
http://www.skymap.com/
|
||||
Reference in new issue
Block a user