He slightly cheated by using a js minifier. It was either javascriptcompressor or his tricks are so close he emulated it.
Plus considering it is missing required elements to be well formed, you might as well drop some of those unnecessary quotes
(Now to go write my ownâŚ)
I did 43 ⌠( with a little bit help from iMacros xD )
On first pass this is my cheat code:
function p(){window.setTimeout("p();",0);document.getElementsByTagName("p")[0].click()};p()
But I can probably optimize that better⌠I got 1998 clicks
I got ~450000 clicks, but perhaps clicking again before the browser has had a chance to re-render is a bit unfair:
(function(e){do{e.click()}while((d(s)-t)<=15e3)})(document.body.firstChild)
Come on, you know better. setInterval. Plus this is more like the kobyashi maru, the best way is not to play.
Document.getElementsByTagName(âbodyâ)[0].innerHTML=â
u r sexy winnar
â; window.location=âhttp://goatse.cxâ;Good question. Iâm not sure what is fair here, ultimately you could just
e=500000000
Itâs so obvious, I can totes make a game in a tweet.
<body>
<iframe src="oldschool.runescape.com">
</iframe>
</body>
youâre right setInterval
is far superior, donât know what I was thinking.
Just a little friendly, chummy grief
I was thinking of a game that would use randomly timed closures to change the background quicklyâclick on blue and you get a point. But 140 chars? Thatâs tough.
But if you ran your main closure generator really tight you could squeeze the resources out of cheat loops
For Sale: Baby Shoes, Click Here.
[Spoiler: if you win the game, you have an opportunity to purchase baby shoes.]
So in general should we call it tct (turing complete tweets)?
For those actually playing it as a game, try it on a tablet - it cuts down the seek time to use your finger instead of a mouse.
I was a bit surprised to find it wasnât written in APL.
Given enough code monkeys Tweeting game source code, Itâs only a matter of time before the Feds designate one of the programs as a munition and haul the programmer into court.
Back in my day, we had Obfuscated C
What? No, thatâs perfectly clear and understandable javascript. The only think that makes it look like itâs been minified is the use of single letters as variable names, but of course youâre going to do that if youâre going to fit it into a tweet. I guarantee that no javascript programmer would have needed to use a minifier on that.
Also, besides a âmissingâ unnecessary semicolon at the end, Iâm not sure whatâs malformed about it, nor what quotes are unnecessary (the ones inside the onclick function are needed because they form a string, and then you need to wrap the onclick in quotes because of the internal quotes or youâll get a syntax error).
You big nerds. â˘á´â˘
Annnnnd⌠hereâs the first nude mod.
<body onload=d=Date.now,t=d(s=0)><p style="float:left" onclick="(e=d(++s)-t)<15e3?style.margin=e%300+' 0 0 '+e*7%300:alert(s)">(o)(o)</p></body>
No, I checked. The var names and his minâed operators are exactly the same style of output as two js minâers online. I never said obfuscated, and it is also reasonable to argue that one who uses minifiers may take up some techniques they observe.