mirror/ioccc
1
0 Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

improved indentation and whitespace for markdown code blocks

Browse Source 
All code blocks in markdown have been intended by at least 4 spaces.

We add `--tab-stop=8` to all `pandoc(1)` executions in order to set
a better tab stop indentation, especially for tab intended code blocks.

Changed `bin/pandoc-wrapper.sh` VERSION from "1.5.3 2024-03-26"
to "1.6 2024-03-31".

Fixed `1991/brnstnd/sorta.README.md` so that the sorta code
is code blocks.

Removed unneeded paragraph group in copyright in `inc/footer.default.html`.

Fixed excess whitespace after list Author on entry `index.html` page.

Changed `bin/output-index-author.sh` VERSION from "1.5.2 2024-03-26"
to "1.6 2024-03-31".

Performed `make www` to perform the above and test under macOS.

TODO: Fix the problem of the initial line of code being extra intended.
TODO: Fix excess whitespace around code that is inline.
This commit is contained in:
Landon Curt Noll committed 2024-04-01 04:48:48 -07:00
1 parent b84c27ce02
commit a996f8d2b8
734 files changed
+16723 -16963
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

No files matched your search

2018/burton1/README.md
+49 -49
View File
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
## To build:
```sh
make
make
```
There is an alternate version of this entry. See [Alternate
@@ -11,14 +11,14 @@ code](#alternate-code) below.
## To use:
```sh
./prog < any-file
./prog < any-file
```
## Try:
```sh
./try.sh
./try.sh
```
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ with `-Wno-` options.
### Alternate build:
```sh
make alt
make alt
```
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ E.g:
```c
main(){system("hd");} // it's turtles all the way down!
main(){system("hd");} // it's turtles all the way down!
```
is not acceptable.
@@ -97,15 +97,15 @@ Here is the 157 character version in it's entirety:
```c
char O,o[ 20];L(O){
putchar ( O+ 48+39 *(9<
O));} I(O) {L(~ 15);
O|| puts(o);} main (l){
for(;~(l=getchar()) ;I(O
&=15 ))o[ O++ ]=4<
(4^l >>5) ?l: 46,L
(l>> 4),L (l&15);O&&
I(o[ O]=0 );}//157c
char O,o[ 20];L(O){
putchar ( O+ 48+39 *(9<
O));} I(O) {L(~ 15);
O|| puts(o);} main (l){
for(;~(l=getchar()) ;I(O
&=15 ))o[ O++ ]=4<
(4^l >>5) ?l: 46,L
(l>> 4),L (l&15);O&&
I(o[ O]=0 );}//157c
```
While thinking about this in the shower (you are not the only one that does this!)
@@ -116,22 +116,22 @@ and it is interesting that the same algorithm can be expressed so differently
by slight rearrangement of its parts.
```c
// 119
char O,o[20];main(l){for(;~(l=getchar());O||puts(o))o[O++]=isprint(l)?l:46,O&=15,printf("%02x ",l);O[o]=0;O&&puts(o);}
// 116
char O,o[20];main(l){for(;O++[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0;(O&=15)||puts(o))printf("%02x ",l);O>1&&puts(o);}
// 115
char O,o[20];main(l){for(;O[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0;(O=-~O&15)||puts(o))printf("%02x ",l);O&&puts(o);}
// 113
char O,o[20];main(l){for(;~l;(O=~l?printf("%02x ",l),-~O&15:!O)||puts(o))O[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0;}
// 112
char O,o[20];main(l){for(;~l;(O=~l?-~O&printf("%02x ",l)*5:!O)||puts(o))O[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0;}
// 111
char O,o[20];main(l){for(;~l;O||puts(o))O=(O[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0)?-~O&printf("%02x ",l)*5:!O;}
// 110
char O,o[0];main(l){for(;~l;O||puts(o))O=(O[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0)?-~O&printf("%02x ",l)*5:!O;}
// 109
char O,o[];main(l){for(;~l;O||puts(o))O=(O[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0)?-~O&printf("%02x ",l)*5:!O;}
// 119
char O,o[20];main(l){for(;~(l=getchar());O||puts(o))o[O++]=isprint(l)?l:46,O&=15,printf("%02x ",l);O[o]=0;O&&puts(o);}
// 116
char O,o[20];main(l){for(;O++[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0;(O&=15)||puts(o))printf("%02x ",l);O>1&&puts(o);}
// 115
char O,o[20];main(l){for(;O[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0;(O=-~O&15)||puts(o))printf("%02x ",l);O&&puts(o);}
// 113
char O,o[20];main(l){for(;~l;(O=~l?printf("%02x ",l),-~O&15:!O)||puts(o))O[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0;}
// 112
char O,o[20];main(l){for(;~l;(O=~l?-~O&printf("%02x ",l)*5:!O)||puts(o))O[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0;}
// 111
char O,o[20];main(l){for(;~l;O||puts(o))O=(O[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0)?-~O&printf("%02x ",l)*5:!O;}
// 110
char O,o[0];main(l){for(;~l;O||puts(o))O=(O[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0)?-~O&printf("%02x ",l)*5:!O;}
// 109
char O,o[];main(l){for(;~l;O||puts(o))O=(O[o]=~(l=getchar())?4<(4^l>>5)?l:46:0)?-~O&printf("%02x ",l)*5:!O;}
```
There are solutions without the ASCII sidebar that are significantly shorter.
@@ -140,16 +140,16 @@ They are derived from the solutions above, but are still fascinating as concise
so here is their progression, for the curious:
```c
// 102
I;O(O){putchar(O+48+39*(9<O));}main(l){for(;~(l=getchar());O(++I&15?~15:~37))O(l>>4),O(l&15);O(-38);}
// 80
O;main(l){while(~(l=getchar()))printf("%02x%c",l,++O&15?32:10);O&15&&puts("");}
// 78
O;main(l){for(;~l;(O=~(l=getchar())?printf("%02x ",l),-~O&15:!O)||puts(""));}
// 77
O;main(l){for(;~l;(O=~(l=getchar())?-~O&printf("%02x ",l)*5:!O)||puts(""));}
// 76
O;main(l){for(;~l;O||puts(&O))O=~(l=getchar())?-~O&printf("%02x ",l)*5:!O;}
// 102
I;O(O){putchar(O+48+39*(9<O));}main(l){for(;~(l=getchar());O(++I&15?~15:~37))O(l>>4),O(l&15);O(-38);}
// 80
O;main(l){while(~(l=getchar()))printf("%02x%c",l,++O&15?32:10);O&15&&puts("");}
// 78
O;main(l){for(;~l;(O=~(l=getchar())?printf("%02x ",l),-~O&15:!O)||puts(""));}
// 77
O;main(l){for(;~l;(O=~(l=getchar())?-~O&printf("%02x ",l)*5:!O)||puts(""));}
// 76
O;main(l){for(;~l;O||puts(&O))O=~(l=getchar())?-~O&printf("%02x ",l)*5:!O;}
```
It is possible to reduce the size of each of these by one by eliding the trailing newline.
@@ -157,13 +157,13 @@ This was not reported above since the newline kept getting appended by processin
and it is more interesting to remove characters by changing code than by filtering:
```sh
$ tr -d '\012' < 109.c | wc -c
108
$ tr -d '\012' < 76.c | wc -c
75
$ tr -d '\012' < 109.c | cc -o 108 -xc -
$ verify 108
$
$ tr -d '\012' < 109.c | wc -c
108
$ tr -d '\012' < 76.c | wc -c
75
$ tr -d '\012' < 109.c | cc -o 108 -xc -
$ verify 108
$
```
An obfuscated hex dump has been done before:
@@ -258,13 +258,13 @@ the expression within the ternary remains too complex.
Try:
```sh
cat prog.c prog.alt.c
cat prog.c prog.alt.c
```
or
```sh
cmp -b prog.c prog.alt.c
cmp -b prog.c prog.alt.c
```
to compare the differences (`diff` is not helpful on a one-liner).