|
MutantBlue posted:You've found the one thing that PHP is good for. It's not even classy looking. code:
|
# ? Apr 15, 2011 06:35 |
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:56 |
|
Bash quine:code:
|
# ? Apr 15, 2011 09:46 |
|
bobthecheese posted:php quine No, this PHP quine is cheating: code:
|
# ? Apr 15, 2011 10:08 |
This PHP pattern:php:<?php include "pages/" . $_GET['page'] . '.php'; ?> (I'm going to hit someone with a blunt instrument when he shows up.)
|
|
# ? Apr 15, 2011 10:12 |
|
bobthecheese posted:php quine yes a quine is a program that prints itself without reading its own code
|
# ? Apr 15, 2011 14:29 |
|
Zombywuf posted:Bash quine: this is also a c quine too.
|
# ? Apr 15, 2011 14:30 |
|
nielsm posted:This PHP pattern:
|
# ? Apr 15, 2011 15:08 |
|
Scaevolus posted:the best quine We had code in production until I replaced it a few years ago that went something like : a csh script that writes a perl script that writes a sql script that passes the output to a different csh script that outputs to a file that is picked up by a cronjob 30 minutes later that sent it to a different server where something similar took place. It took me the better part of a day to figure out the workflow.
|
# ? Apr 15, 2011 15:15 |
|
tef posted:this is also a c quine too. code:
|
# ? Apr 15, 2011 19:30 |
EvilJay posted:We had code in production until I replaced it a few years ago that went something like : I've seen workflows that absurd as part of the AWIPS system the National Weather Service uses. You are not alone.
|
|
# ? Apr 15, 2011 19:31 |
|
nielsm posted:This PHP pattern: This type of stuff is how c99.php (and others) end up on your server. At the very least, it should check that the included page is an actual page that exists on your server, otherwise it's open to attack via passing a URL, etc. PHP would read the URL, and execute any php code found there, which means that people can execute arbitrary code on your server (which they generally do to install a root-kit).
|
# ? Apr 15, 2011 22:54 |
|
pseudorandom name posted:
it was an accepted and winning entry into ioccc
|
# ? Apr 16, 2011 00:30 |
|
tef posted:it was an accepted and winning entry into ioccc They used weird build settings, I thought.
|
# ? Apr 16, 2011 19:19 |
|
code:
|
# ? Apr 16, 2011 19:33 |
|
I changed names to anonymize it.code:
|
# ? Apr 16, 2011 21:56 |
|
// The great pyramid /
|
# ? Apr 16, 2011 22:05 |
|
Scaevolus posted:the best quine Oh my god
|
# ? Apr 16, 2011 22:14 |
|
For those of you playing along at home, QuineRelay needs to be one line of text, not wrapped like the post here or the original web page. Also, in the comments on the web page, there's a modified version that adds Erlang and sh.
|
# ? Apr 16, 2011 22:43 |
|
Is there some kind of quine theory that reduces creating quines to some sort of mechanical procedure, or did that guy just spend way too much time on it
|
# ? Apr 17, 2011 00:20 |
|
Volte posted:Is there some kind of quine theory that reduces creating quines to some sort of mechanical procedure, or did that guy just spend way too much time on it e: okay, the haskell one does a bit of non-trivial escaping into brainfuck (and probably whitespace as well) Scaevolus fucked around with this message at 00:35 on Apr 17, 2011 |
# ? Apr 17, 2011 00:30 |
|
Volte posted:Is there some kind of quine theory that reduces creating quines to some sort of mechanical procedure, or did that guy just spend way too much time on it Well, there's Kleene's Recursion Theorem.
|
# ? Apr 17, 2011 04:10 |
|
Molog posted:I changed names to anonymize it.
|
# ? Apr 17, 2011 04:31 |
|
BlackMK4 posted:How the gently caress did that guy get a job? I guess he must have been curious and intelligent
|
# ? Apr 17, 2011 05:23 |
|
Not sure how he got a job or why he doesn't get fired. Guy causes more problems than he solves. In the last project I did with him we would have finished faster if he had stayed at home for half a year. He gets more more money than most other software engineers at the company too. I added the great pyramid comment because I found the code funny.
|
# ? Apr 17, 2011 12:30 |
|
Scaevolus posted:hq9+ quine The best part of hq9+ is the + instruction.
|
# ? Apr 17, 2011 13:09 |
|
Now this certainly should not be down so far Let's kick it up with 100% MORE ENTERPRISE
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 16:58 |
|
NotShadowStar posted:Now this certainly should not be down so far auaaaaaauioioiuaaaaaaaaaaeeeeeeuaughtaoeunnnnaaaaaaaaaaaaaaeeeeeeeo drat, the noise I made when I saw that is hard to spell.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 17:17 |
|
The sound of Tim Bray stamping on a human face - forever.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 18:25 |
|
NotShadowStar posted:Now this certainly should not be down so far What is the point of this? It's just encapsulating JSON into XML?
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 18:36 |
|
Xml is enterprise. Json works. Discuss. Bigger scary part: who the gently caress needs an XML security appliance?
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 19:00 |
|
wwb posted:Xml is enterprise. Json works. Discuss. EVERYONE needs an xml security appliance; also a boys' band
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 19:07 |
|
NotShadowStar posted:Now this certainly should not be down so far GHAEERARJKSHJKGHJKGHSJKDHFJKSDHASDH
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 19:51 |
|
revmoo posted:What is the point of this? It's just encapsulating JSON into XML? pre:{ "name":"John Smith" "address": { "streetAddress": "21 2nd Street", "city": "New York", "state": "NY", "postalCode": 10021, }, "phoneNumbers": [ "212 555-1111", "212 555-2222" ], "additionalInfo": null, "remote": false, "height": 62.4, "ficoScore": " > 640" } pre:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <json:object xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.datapower.com/schemas/json jsonx.xsd" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:json="http://www.ibm.com/xmlns/prod/2009/jsonx"> <json:string name="name">John Smith</json:string> <json:object name="address"> <json:string name="streetAddress">21 2nd Street</json:string> <json:string name="city">New York</json:string> <json:string name="state">NY</json:string> <json:number name="postalCode">10021</json:number> </json:object> <json:array name="phoneNumbers"> <json:string>212 555-1111</json:string> <json:string>212 555-2222</json:string> </json:array> <json:null name="additionalInfo" /> <json:boolean name="remote">false</json:boolean> <json:number name="height">62.4</json:number> <json:string name="ficoScore">> 640</json:string> </json:object>
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 19:59 |
|
Holy poo poo!
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 20:08 |
|
I wonder if there's a point where something passes being a horror and becomes a crime against coding... I mean what's next, make a wrapper that de-normalizes an RDB into name value pairs?
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 20:32 |
|
Relational to key value has disturbingly been done many times. We can start with FOR_XML_AUTO. Oh, and who the gently caress submitted that xjson poo poo to reddit.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 20:47 |
|
wwb posted:Bigger scary part: who the gently caress needs an XML security appliance? We had a few of those when I worked for the government. No idea what they did but drat were they expensive
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 20:50 |
|
I'm annoyed that I can't find a video I saw recently of two guys making a presentation about bad ideas done well. Among other things they had, if I remember right, embedded php in the ruby runtime. Why? Because Enterprise! e: VVVV Yes! Yes!! Doc Hawkins fucked around with this message at 21:54 on Apr 29, 2011 |
# ? Apr 29, 2011 20:56 |
|
Doc Hawkins posted:I'm annoyed that I can't find a video I saw recently of two guys making a presentation about bad ideas done well. Among other things they had, if I remember right, embedded php in the ruby runtime. Why? Because Enterprise! http://confreaks.net/videos/198-rubyconf2009-worst-ideas-ever Aaron Patterson is loving hilarious, if a bit awkward hipster. The best part is transforming the ruby abstract syntax tree, converting it to XML and doing all types of retarded things with it.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 21:01 |
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:56 |
|
Phuby on Phails
|
# ? Apr 29, 2011 21:33 |