Never-before-seen obfuscation

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Never-before-seen obfuscation by Anonymous Monk on Jul 05, 2004 at 09:28 UTC
Never-before-seen? Hopefully, never to be seen as well. The only thing unclear in here is whether you understand what an obfuscation is. (Yet a different Aninymonk)	[reply]
Re: Never-before-seen obfuscation by Anonymous Monk on Jul 05, 2004 at 07:24 UTC
`' Never-before-seen obfuscation 123 => die die die kill exit warn open There once was an obfuscation from Nantucket, It was really lame and fit inside a bucket, All the newbies **cked Because they thought it sucked Not really from Nantucket. '; print "just another perl hacker\n";` [download]	[reply] [d/l]
Re: Never-before-seen obfuscation by perldeveloper (Scribe) on Jul 05, 2004 at 15:27 UTC
Sometimes I wonder whether running these `obfuscations' won't erase all my files or something. I hope the approval process is accurate enough and takes care of malicious scripts, in this section or any other section.	[reply]
Re^2: Never-before-seen obfuscation by dakkar (Hermit) on Jul 05, 2004 at 16:11 UTC
"approval"? There is no "approval process"! You can write anything you want in perlmonks. As for "erasing all your files", well, most of the point of obfuscations is to try to de-obfuscate them by hand, then trying with B::Deparse, and only after that, if you still aren't sure of some fine point, running them. Inside a Safe, in a `chroot`ed environment, in the debugger... -- dakkar - Mobilis in mobile Most of my code is tested... Perl is strongly typed, it just has very few types (Dan)	[reply]
Re: Never-before-seen obfuscation by maetrics (Sexton) on Jul 25, 2004 at 10:10 UTC
The idea of using filler is a good start (while not original) this could have been a ++ worthy submission if more time was taken to complete the thought.	[reply]
Re: Never-before-seen obfuscation by Jasper (Chaplain) on Jul 13, 2004 at 08:25 UTC
I did snigger, admittedly. But no ++ :)	[reply]


laziness, impatience, and hubris
	PerlMonks