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*******@gmail.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.

[Eric Sosman]

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".

It "print[s] 1 to 100 without using any kind of looping."
All the loops are over and done with before the printing starts,
and the printing uses no loops. To look at it another way, I'm
choosing to parse the problem statement with a low precedence
assigned to "and."

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

[Richard Heathfield]

Eric Sosman said:

<snip>

It "print[s] 1 to 100 without using any kind of looping."
All the loops are over and done with before the printing starts,
and the printing uses no loops. To look at it another way, I'm
choosing to parse the problem statement with a low precedence
assigned to "and."

Those 0s in "100" look suspiciously like loops to me! :-)
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.

[Richard Tobin]

In article <MP********************@bt.com>,
Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:

>... 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".

char *loops = "1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 "
"21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 "
"41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 "
"61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 "
"81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100";
printf("%s\n", loops);

-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.

[Richard Heathfield]

Richard Tobin said:

In article <MP********************@bt.com>,
Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:

>>... 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".

char *loops = [...]
printf("%s\n", loops);

This fails to meet the req - oh, you SOAB. :-)

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

[Lew Pitcher]

Nirjhar Oberoi 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?

Sure I can. Can't you? What do you think the trinary operator is used
for if not evaluating conditions? And that's just the most esoteric
one; there are also for(), while() and do() operations that could also
substitute for an if-else construct with some work.

OTOH, I'd fire any language developer who neglected to include if/else
in his C compiler, wouldn't you?

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?

Of course I can.

The simplest way is to just
puts("1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10");...
until you print all 99 of your numbers.

There are other, fancier ways, of course.

[Nirjhar Oberoi]

Consider this code and give ur Opinion

Code written in Turbo C
------------------------------------------------
#include <stdio.h>
#include <conio.h>

static int i = 1;

void foo() {
if (i 100)
return;
else {
printf("%d ",i);
foo();
}
}

int main(void) {
foo();
}
-------------------------------------------------

What say? will it work????

Ofcourse!!!!

[Richard Heathfield]

Nirjhar Oberoi said:

Consider this code and give ur Opinion

Code written in Turbo C

Well, C, pretty much, if you just lose the conio.h header, which is
non-standard and which you don't need.

------------------------------------------------
#include <stdio.h>
#include <conio.h>

static int i = 1;

void foo() {
if (i 100)
return;
else {
printf("%d ",i);
foo();
}
}

int main(void) {
foo();
}
-------------------------------------------------

What say? will it work????

No.

>
Ofcourse!!!!

Of course not. Try it!

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

[santosh]

Nirjhar Oberoi wrote:

Please quote the message to which you're replying.

Consider this code and give ur Opinion

Code written in Turbo C
------------------------------------------------
#include <stdio.h>
#include <conio.h>

static int i = 1;

void foo() {
if (i 100)
return;
else {
printf("%d ",i);
foo();
}
}

int main(void) {
foo();
}
-------------------------------------------------

What say? will it work????

Ofcourse!!!!

No, it won't. Compile it and see.

[Lew Pitcher]

Nirjhar Oberoi 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?

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?

OK, now make certain I get my share of your marks.

#include <stdio.h>
void CountTo(int n)
{
(n-1)?CountTo(n-1):0; printf("%d\n",n);
}

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

[CBFalconer]

Nirjhar Oberoi wrote:

>
Consider this code and give ur Opinion

Ur was an ancient city in Mesopotamia. I don't think the
inhabitants ever heard of the C language. Makes it hard for the
city to have an opinion.

>
Code written in Turbo C

So what?

------------------------------------------------
#include <stdio.h>
#include <conio.h>

Non-standard include. No such thing.

>
static int i = 1;

void foo() {
if (i 100)
return;
else {
printf("%d ",i);
foo();
}
}

int main(void) {
foo();
}

Failure to return a value. At least you defined main correctly.
With the corrections indicated the program will probably print "1"
some number of times and then crash. Or it might assassinate all
males over 15. Neither of these is especially desirable.

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

[Barry Schwarz]

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 16:29:01 -0500, CBFalconer <cb********@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Nirjhar Oberoi wrote:

>>
Consider this code and give ur Opinion

Ur was an ancient city in Mesopotamia. I don't think the
inhabitants ever heard of the C language. Makes it hard for the
city to have an opinion.

The opinion of non-sentient objects, such as cities, is always
suspect.
Remove del for email

[Lew Pitcher]

Lew Pitcher wrote:

Nirjhar Oberoi 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?

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?

OK, now make certain I get my share of your marks.

[snip first attempt]

Even better:

#include <stdio.h>
int CountTo(int n)
{
return printf("%d\n",(n-1)?CountTo(n-1):1), n+1;
}

int main(void)
{
CountTo(10);
return 0;
}

[Lew Pitcher]

Lew Pitcher wrote:

Nirjhar Oberoi 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?

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?

OK, now make certain I get my share of your marks.

[snip first attempt]

Even better than the last one (which had a minor flaw in main()):

#include <stdio.h>
int CountTo(int n)
{
return printf("%d\n",(n-1)?CountTo(n-1):1), n+1;
}

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

[Old Wolf]

CBFalconer wrote:

Nirjhar Oberoi wrote:

Consider this code and give ur Opinion

Ur was an ancient city in Mesopotamia. I don't think the
inhabitants ever heard of the C language.

Ur probably right

Makes it hard for the city to have an opinion.

The OP asked for "ur Opinion", not "ur's Opinion".
As an aside, did u ever live in ur?

[CBFalconer]

Old Wolf wrote:

CBFalconer wrote:

>Nirjhar Oberoi wrote:

>>>
Consider this code and give ur Opinion

Ur was an ancient city in Mesopotamia. I don't think the
inhabitants ever heard of the C language.

Ur probably right

>Makes it hard for the city to have an opinion.

The OP asked for "ur Opinion", not "ur's Opinion".
As an aside, did u ever live in ur?

Why ask me? Ask him. Why do you think that Ur was Republican?

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