TWISTER 2: Read on....

[Nirjhar Oberoi]

TWISTER 2.1
¿? Your have to take a decision in a program but the creator of the
programming language forgot to supply the programmer with a IF-ELE
Construct? Can you find a work arround?

TWISTER 2.2
¿? You have to use loops and print 1 to 100 without using any kind of
looping not even GOTO statement? Can u do it?
(* *)
*************** *************** 0oo*********(_) ******oo0****** *************** *****

SMALLEST CODE WILL BE APPRECIATED

:)

[Richard Heathfield]

Nirjhar Oberoi said:

TWISTER 2.1
¿? Your have to take a decision in a program but the creator of the
programming language forgot to supply the programmer with a IF-ELE
Construct? Can you find a work arround?

That depends on what you think IF-ELE should do. Personally, I think it
should subtract the value of ELE from the value of IF, yielding the
difference between the two. The workaround would be as follows:

diff = IF;
diff -= ELE;

TWISTER 2.2
¿? You have to use loops and print 1 to 100 without using any kind of
looping not even GOTO statement? Can u do it?

I don't think he can. I don't think anyone else can either, since using
loops without using any kind of looping is likely to challenge the
ingenuity of even the most perspicacious programmer. Nevertheless, printing
1 to 100 without using any kind of looping is trivial:

puts("1 to 100");

SMALLEST CODE WILL BE APPRECIATED

No problem. Here ya go:

main(){}

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.

[CBFalconer]

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Nirjhar Oberoi said:

.... snip ...

>

> ¿? You have to use loops and print 1 to 100 without using any
kind of looping not even GOTO statement? Can u do it?

I don't think he can. I don't think anyone else can either, since
using loops without using any kind of looping is likely to
challenge the ingenuity of even the most perspicacious programmer.
Nevertheless, printing 1 to 100 without using any kind of looping
is trivial:

puts("1 to 100");

You forgot about recursion:

#include <stdio.h>

void putn(int n) {
if (n - 1) putn(n - 1);
printf("%d\n", n);
}

int main(void) {putn(100); return 0;}

which even the all seeing u can use. Why do people give their
children one character names?

--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home .att.net>

[Zara]

On 23 Nov 2006 21:40:06 -0800, "Nirjhar Oberoi" <ni*******@gmai l.com>
wrote:

>TWISTER 2.1
¿? Your have to take a decision in a program but the creator of the
programming language forgot to supply the programmer with a IF-ELE
Construct? Can you find a work arround?

You may take a peek at local newspapaers, probably ther is some work
around, where you are not asked to make decisions. Street sweeping?
Maybe

>TWISTER 2.2
¿? You have to use loops and print 1 to 100 without using any kind of
looping not even GOTO statement? Can u do it?

Ah! that was VHDL, not C! Off Topic here.

library loops;
use loops.all;

print:std_logic _vector(1 to 100)=(others=>' U');

As you can see, not only U, but also OTHERS can do it!

SMALLEST CODE WILL BE APPRECIATED

Try with Huffman coding.

Regards,

Zara

[Richard Heathfield]

CBFalconer said:

You forgot about recursion:

No, I didn't. I was saving that in case he turned out to be serious, and to
provide some effort of his own.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.

[CBFalconer]

Richard Heathfield wrote:

CBFalconer said:

>You forgot about recursion:

No, I didn't. I was saving that in case he turned out to be serious,
and to provide some effort of his own.

Well, I kept the example subtly obtuse (the output order and end
points) to give him something to think about. However I think
"challenge the ingenuity of the most perspicacious" implies
impossibility or the need for non-standard code.

--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home .att.net>

[Richard Heathfield]

CBFalconer said:

Richard Heathfield wrote:

>CBFalconer said:

>>You forgot about recursion:

No, I didn't. I was saving that in case he turned out to be serious,
and to provide some effort of his own.

Well, I kept the example subtly obtuse (the output order and end
points) to give him something to think about. However I think
"challenge the ingenuity of the most perspicacious" implies
impossibility or the need for non-standard code.

Yes, I implied impossibility, and I stand by that. You can't use loops
without using loops, which is what he asked. A recursive call is not a loop
per se. Nevertheless, I agree that it is probably what his tutor had in
mind.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.

[Eric Sosman]

CBFalconer wrote:

Richard Heathfield wrote:

>>CBFalconer said:

>>>You forgot about recursion:

No, I didn't. I was saving that in case he turned out to be serious,
and to provide some effort of his own.

Well, I kept the example subtly obtuse (the output order and end
points) to give him something to think about. However I think
"challenge the ingenuity of the most perspicacious" implies
impossibility or the need for non-standard code.

The original problem statement, in full, was

¿? You have to use loops and print 1 to 100 without using any kind of
looping not even GOTO statement? Can u do it?

.... and neither CBF's nor RH's code meets the requirement to
"use loops." I offer the following as a possible solution:

#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {
char buff[293], *p = buff;
int n;
for (n = 1; n <= 100; ++n) {
sprintf(p, "%d\n", n);
while (*p)
++p;
}
fputs (buff, stdout);
return 0;
}

This program

- Uses loops (two of them; it could have been simpler were
"loops" not in the plural)

- "and"

- Prints 1 to 100 without using any kind of looping (the
output is generated by one execution of an fputs() call).

However, even this doesn't answer the question. It doesn't matter
if I or CBF or RH can produce a solution; the question asks whether
the former Secretary General can do it. Anybody know how to get
in touch with him?

--
Eric Sosman
es*****@acm-dot-org.invalid

[Richard Heathfield]

Eric Sosman said:

<snip>

>
The original problem statement, in full, was

¿? You have to use loops and print 1 to 100 without using any kind of
looping not even GOTO statement? Can u do it?

... and neither CBF's nor RH's code meets the requirement to
"use loops."

....and yours doesn't meet the requirement *not* to use "any kind of
looping".

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.

[Harald van Dijk]

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Eric Sosman said:

<snip>

The original problem statement, in full, was

¿? You have to use loops and print 1 to 100 without using any kind of
looping not even GOTO statement? Can u do it?

... and neither CBF's nor RH's code meets the requirement to
"use loops."

...and yours doesn't meet the requirement *not* to use "any kind of
looping".

There is no such requirement. There is a requirement to print 1 to 100
without using any kind of looping. Eric Sosman's code uses a loop, but
not for the actual printing.