/prog/ - Homework

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 14:12

Write some obfuscated code to print 'Sussman' to the screen 100 times

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 14:21

import sys, base64
eval(base64.b64decode('c3lzLnN0ZG91dC53cml0ZSgiICIuam9pbihbIlN1c3NtYW4iXSAqIDEwMCkp'))

Shit brix!

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 14:52

print("Sussman\n");

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 15:01



echo str_repeat(strrev("\n" . 'namssuS'), 100);

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 15:35



puts("Shushiman");

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 15:39

もえプリントエッフ～

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 16:05

print"namssuS"[0::-1]

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 16:12

>>3,5,7
These only print once, and >>3 isn't obfuscated in the slightest
oh well, since I'm too lazy to write real obfuscated code, have a state machine

(define (sussmen num)

  (letrec ([sn -1]

           [numb num]

           [s (lambda ()

                (display #\s)

                (c))]

           [u (lambda ()

                (display #\u)

                (s))]

           [m (lambda ()

                (display #\m)

                (a))]

           [a (lambda ()

                (display #\a)

                (n))]

           [n (lambda ()

                (display #\n)

                (nl))]

           [nl (lambda ()

                 (display #\newline)

                 (nxt))]

           [nxt (lambda ()

                  (unless (zero? numb) (set! numb (- numb 1)) (s)))]

           [c (lambda ()

                ((case (begin (set! sn (+ sn 1)) (modulo sn 3))

                  ((0) u)

                  ((1) s)

                  ((2) m))))])

    (nxt)))

(sussmen 100)

and No, sussmen isn't a typo

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 16:19

:noname 99 for cr s" Sussman" type next ; execute

Name: 8 2009-11-02 16:42

Still not obfuscated really, any one fancy doing a better job?

(define (suss k)

  (display #\s)

  (k (lambda (k)

       (display #\s)

       (k (lambda (k)

            (display #\m)

            (k (lambda (k)

                 (display #\n)

            (k k)))

            )))))

(define (man k)

  (display #\u)

  (k (lambda (k)

       (display #\s)

       (k (lambda (k)

            (display #\a)

            (k (lambda (k)

                 (display #\newline)))

            )))))

(do ((i 0 (+ i 1))) ; why does no-one ever remember `do` when others are

    ((= i 100) i)   ; mocking Scheme's apparent lack of iteration constructs

    (suss man))

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 17:50

sub'_($){eval join'*',2..shift}$==-37+_+5;print+(map chr($=+=-$_),(0,-((_+4)+10),_+2,$|,_+3,(_+3)*2,-13,(_+5)-20))x((_+5)-20)

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-10 8:25

Name: Anonymous 2013-08-31 22:56

A set Y is at least as big as a set X if there is an injective (one-to-one) mapping from the elements of X to the elements of Y. A one-to-one mapping identifies each element of the set X with a unique element of the set Y. This is most easily understood by an example; suppose we have the sets X = {1,2,3} and Y = {a,b,c,d}, then using this notion of size we would observe that there is a mapping:

    1 → a

    2 → b

    3 → c

Name: Anonymous 2013-08-31 23:41

For example, the set of integers is countably infinite, while the infinite set of real numbers is uncountable.

Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 0:26

Cosmologists have long sought to discover whether infinity exists in our physical universe: Are there an infinite number of stars? Does the universe have infinite volume? Does space "go on forever"? This is an open question of cosmology. Note that the question of being infinite is logically separate from the question of having boundaries.

Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 1:12

The systems of New Foundations NFU (allowing urelements) and NF (lacking them) are not based on a cumulative hierarchy. NF and NFU include a "set of everything," relative to which every set has a complement. In these systems urelements matter, because NF, but not NFU, produces sets for which the axiom of choice does not hold.

Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 1:57

Morse–Kelley set theory admits proper classes as basic objects, like NBG, but also allows quantification over all proper classes in its set existence axioms. This causes MK to be strictly stronger than both NBG and ZF.

Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 2:41

The pieces in this decomposition, constructed using the axiom of choice, are non-measurable sets.

Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 3:27

One of the most interesting aspects of the axiom of choice is the large number of places in mathematics that it shows up. Here are some statements that require the axiom of choice in the sense that they are not provable from ZF but are provable from ZFC (ZF plus AC). Equivalently, these statements are true in all models of ZFC but false in some models of ZF.

Homework

1 Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 14:12

2 Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 14:21

3 Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 14:52

4 Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 15:01

5 Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 15:35

6 Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 15:39

7 Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 16:05

8 Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 16:12

9 Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 16:19

10 Name: 8 2009-11-02 16:42

11 Name: Anonymous 2009-11-02 17:50

12 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-10 8:25

13 Name: Anonymous 2013-08-31 22:56

14 Name: Anonymous 2013-08-31 23:41

15 Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 0:26

16 Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 1:12

17 Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 1:57

18 Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 2:41

19 Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 3:27