by ayoreis on 7/26/24, 5:45 PM with 36 comments
by faxmeyourcode on 7/26/24, 6:34 PM
The fact that this can introduce OCR bugs into your C code is hilarious, and this is diabolical:
#define one ( 4 - 3 )
#define eleven ( 3 + 4 + 4 )
Source code is here https://github.com/lexbailey/compilerfaxby JoshTriplett on 7/26/24, 7:56 PM
I'm curious why this requires a reply number in the program, rather than relying on something like Caller ID and sending the reply back to the number that sent the fax.
by khaki54 on 7/26/24, 6:32 PM
by jabbany on 7/26/24, 10:21 PM
Could have a form that you fax in with, like a URL and session info (cookies and stuff), and then it faxes back the page, and you can circle stuff and fax the page back to interact and "click on" things.
Plus, since computers can ingest faxes, you wouldn't need to waste paper printing everything out, and could just do everything digitally. But you still had the option to use paper and a fax machine if you really need to.
^: Yes, I know faxes are unencrypted and phone lines can be tapped. But I've always found the idea intriguing. Plus having some emergency point-to-point communication to bootstrap things like key exchange could still be neat.
by fortran77 on 7/26/24, 11:50 PM
I submitted my deck of cards to a person in the computer center at one of the times the PL/C compiler was scheduled to run (10 AM and 2 PM), I sat and waited, and then my output would be handed to me after it was compiled and run.
by kazinator on 7/26/24, 6:32 PM
(progn . #1=((print 'foo) . #1#))
by odo1242 on 7/26/24, 9:33 PM
by rickreynoldssf on 7/26/24, 10:32 PM
by nehal3m on 7/26/24, 7:10 PM
by l0rn on 7/26/24, 6:48 PM
by davidkunz on 7/26/24, 6:18 PM
by xyst on 7/27/24, 12:20 AM
by throwway120385 on 7/26/24, 6:12 PM
by ManWith2Plans on 7/26/24, 8:04 PM
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5508110/why-is-this-prog...