|
 |
Well, now that the votes are in, and the judges are counting the
bribes^h^h^h^h^h^h votes, I'd just like to comment on some of the
entries.
Mine, of course, were great. :-)
They all looked good. I suppose, the entrants, like me, didn't enter
the ones that didn't. (I had a picture of some jellyfish, but just
couldn't get them to look right - a dozen or fifty more characters might
have done it.)
Of the other entries, I would say that ks8 - the line drawing of the
airplane, struck me as very unique. I assume the author created a 3d
set of lines, and just presented 4 rotations of it. The apparent
simplicity really impressed me. And knowing it was under 500 characters,
wow!
I thought the chocolate bar (cho) was the best looking representative of
a real object. Is the POV symbol in the fonts shipped with it?
fwk - the fireworks - looked better as a small picture - it didn't look
as real in the large version.
Most of the abstracts (cit, bs1, bs2, bs3, jn2 ks7, str) didn't do
anything for me. But for some reason, the blue, blobby one (hf1)
fascinated me. I'm looking forward to see how that one was generated.
jn1 - the scrub grass? was too dark. But I am looking forward to seeing
how that was generated, too. This is one of the best parts of the
contest - seeing parts of POV used that you hadn't understood (or known
about); the length of the code guarantees that it will be fairly clean -
there isn't a lot of room for additions that while they might make the
image better, make the code more difficult to understand.
My one complaint with the last contest (besides not winning :-) was the
expanded code that wasn't commented. What's the point of putting in the
end of lines, if the code isn't any easier to understand?
Thanks Mr. Johnson for holding this. Thanks everyone else for entering
(except those who beat me). I thought all the pictures were good, and
when I picked my top 6 I had a lot of trouble doing it.
--
Tom A.
When scientist say they're making a "quantum leap" it
means they are going out to catch some rays. - Dr. Science
Deja mail is gone. Look for me at raugost at yahoo . com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
|
|
"Tom A." <tar### [at] my-deja com> wrote in message
news:3D3DA71D.6DCB05AE@my-deja.com...
> My one complaint with the last contest (besides not winning :-) was the
> expanded code that wasn't commented. What's the point of putting in the
> end of lines, if the code isn't any easier to understand?
Ah, but it *is*.
Since you brought it up, here are the results. Been too busy to complete the
web page in timely manner.
ALPHABETICAL SORT
bytes bytes^2 EfficiencArtistry Paucity
bs1 280 78400 3.57 10 1.28
bs2 500 250000 9.60 48 1.92
bs3 108 11664 0.00 0 0.00
cdl 497 247009 6.04 30 1.21
cel 498 248004 0.00 0 0.00
cho 485 235225 0.62 3 0.13
cit 496 246016 2.02 10 0.41
crn 497 247009 0.60 3 0.12
eth 439 192721 0.00 0 0.00
fwk 409 167281 4.16 17 1.02
hf1 379 143641 3.17 12 0.84
jar 201 40401 2.99 6 1.49
jn1 447 199809 2.24 10 0.50
jn2 321 103041 3.12 10 0.97
ks7 495 245025 1.21 6 0.24
ks8 470 220900 0.64 3 0.14
ks9 500 250000 4.20 21 0.84
lmp 500 250000 2.60 13 0.52
mud 491 241081 2.85 14 0.58
pto 243 59049 18.11 44 7.45
ray 469 219961 0.85 4 0.18
rv2 423 178929 7.09 30 1.68
rvm 404 163216 0.00 0 0.00
sku 493 243049 0.00 0 0.00
str 150 22500 10.00 15 6.67
ta6 497 247009 0.00 0 0.00
ta7 499 249001 0.00 0 0.00
ta9 426 181476 0.00 0 0.00
tor 494 244036 1.21 6 0.25
EFFICIENCY SORT
bytes bytes^2 EfficiencArtistry Paucity
pto 243 59049 18.11 44 7.45
str 150 22500 10.00 15 6.67
bs2 500 250000 9.60 48 1.92
rv2 423 178929 7.09 30 1.68
cdl 497 247009 6.04 30 1.21
ks9 500 250000 4.20 21 0.84
fwk 409 167281 4.16 17 1.02
bs1 280 78400 3.57 10 1.28
hf1 379 143641 3.17 12 0.84
jn2 321 103041 3.12 10 0.97
jar 201 40401 2.99 6 1.49
mud 491 241081 2.85 14 0.58
lmp 500 250000 2.60 13 0.52
jn1 447 199809 2.24 10 0.50
cit 496 246016 2.02 10 0.41
tor 494 244036 1.21 6 0.25
ks7 495 245025 1.21 6 0.24
ray 469 219961 0.85 4 0.18
ks8 470 220900 0.64 3 0.14
cho 485 235225 0.62 3 0.13
crn 497 247009 0.60 3 0.12
eth 439 192721 0.00 0 0.00
ta6 497 247009 0.00 0 0.00
sku 493 243049 0.00 0 0.00
rvm 404 163216 0.00 0 0.00
cel 498 248004 0.00 0 0.00
ta7 499 249001 0.00 0 0.00
bs3 108 11664 0.00 0 0.00
ta9 426 181476 0.00 0 0.00
ARTISTRY SORT
bytes bytes^2 EfficiencArtistry Paucity
bs2 500 250000 9.60 48 1.92
pto 243 59049 18.11 44 7.45
cdl 497 247009 6.04 30 1.21
rv2 423 178929 7.09 30 1.68
ks9 500 250000 4.20 21 0.84
fwk 409 167281 4.16 17 1.02
str 150 22500 10.00 15 6.67
mud 491 241081 2.85 14 0.58
lmp 500 250000 2.60 13 0.52
hf1 379 143641 3.17 12 0.84
cit 496 246016 2.02 10 0.41
bs1 280 78400 3.57 10 1.28
jn2 321 103041 3.12 10 0.97
jn1 447 199809 2.24 10 0.50
ks7 495 245025 1.21 6 0.24
jar 201 40401 2.99 6 1.49
tor 494 244036 1.21 6 0.25
ray 469 219961 0.85 4 0.18
ks8 470 220900 0.64 3 0.14
cho 485 235225 0.62 3 0.13
crn 497 247009 0.60 3 0.12
cel 498 248004 0.00 0 0.00
bs3 108 11664 0.00 0 0.00
ta7 499 249001 0.00 0 0.00
ta9 426 181476 0.00 0 0.00
rvm 404 163216 0.00 0 0.00
sku 493 243049 0.00 0 0.00
ta6 497 247009 0.00 0 0.00
eth 439 192721 0.00 0 0.00
PAUCITY SORT
bytes bytes^2 EfficiencArtistry Paucity
pto 243 59049 18.11 44 7.45
str 150 22500 10.00 15 6.67
bs2 500 250000 9.60 48 1.92
rv2 423 178929 7.09 30 1.68
jar 201 40401 2.99 6 1.49
bs1 280 78400 3.57 10 1.28
cdl 497 247009 6.04 30 1.21
fwk 409 167281 4.16 17 1.02
jn2 321 103041 3.12 10 0.97
ks9 500 250000 4.20 21 0.84
hf1 379 143641 3.17 12 0.84
mud 491 241081 2.85 14 0.58
lmp 500 250000 2.60 13 0.52
jn1 447 199809 2.24 10 0.50
cit 496 246016 2.02 10 0.41
tor 494 244036 1.21 6 0.25
ks7 495 245025 1.21 6 0.24
ray 469 219961 0.85 4 0.18
ks8 470 220900 0.64 3 0.14
cho 485 235225 0.62 3 0.13
crn 497 247009 0.60 3 0.12
ta9 426 181476 0.00 0 0.00
bs3 108 11664 0.00 0 0.00
ta7 499 249001 0.00 0 0.00
ta6 497 247009 0.00 0 0.00
eth 439 192721 0.00 0 0.00
sku 493 243049 0.00 0 0.00
rvm 404 163216 0.00 0 0.00
cel 498 248004 0.00 0 0.00
Post a reply to this message
|
|
|
|
Tom A. <tar### [at] my-dejacom> wrote:
> My one complaint with the last contest (besides not winning :-) was the
> expanded code that wasn't commented. What's the point of putting in the
> end of lines, if the code isn't any easier to understand?
Commenting a deeply-developed obfuscated code in such a way that it really
explains what's going on there is almost as laborious as producing the code
itself. Usually you can't explain it with one line comments.
I personally was just too lazy to do it.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
