

The 21st IOCCC Winners - dlowe
http://www.ioccc.org/2012/whowon.html

======
hafabnew
The way the site is run really lets the contest down.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
Why? How? They have a single page with all the winners ever, and for each C
file they also have a hint.text/hint.markdown/hint.html file. They also have a
Twitter feed.

What's so bad about that?

~~~
hafabnew
Weeeelll:

1) As others have pointed out, the separate release of code/writeup. I wager
that most people really just want to see the code. Why bother doing both? If
it's just to attract attention, that's a reasonably valid reason -- but it
probably has the opposite of the desired effect, people get annoyed that they
can't view the code now, and therefore start disliking the contest in general.

2) Even when the code is released, the format they use makes it difficult to
actually look at the code. Let's take the 2011 winners for example [1]. One
would assume that clicking each entry (e.g., the top entry[2]) would perhaps
show the code, perhaps annotated in a useful way... nope! Surely it must link
to the code then... nope! Perhaps it links to a page that links to the code...
nope!

You have to go to the 'Winning Entries' page from the main menu (from [1]),
scroll down to the appropriate year, then play a fun game of matching up
entrant's surnames to their entries (yes, I know the surname is in the URL of
[2]).

[ 3) While not a 'real' complaint: the I-just-learned-how-to-
use-a-3D-modelling-program logo really is awful. It makes the contest look
juvenile, when in fact the quality of the winning entries is very high. The
site looks much better without the logo -- try it yourself, delete the img
node from the homepage using Inspector/Firebug/whatever. ]

In conclusion: show us the code, delete the logo :).

[1] <http://www.ioccc.org/2011/whowon.html>

[2] <http://www.ioccc.org/2011/blakely/hint.html>

~~~
lifthrasiir
1) The primary reason to do separate releases is because the winning entries
do not appear in the website as is. As far as I know the judges have to write
separate remarks, the authors have to check any remaining problems and judges
and authors have to agree on the finished write-ups. While it is a bit
tedious, given the number of winning entries it seems reasonable.

2) Yup, agreed. For example the current website does not allow inspecting the
code without downloading it first. (That's why I love www2.us.ioccc.org...)

3) They are not ordinary logos. They are made from the ray tracers from
previous IOCCC winners (2004/garave and 2011/zucker, respectively). I do think
that those logos should really link to the relevant entries, however.

~~~
ioccc
(2) and (3) are now fixed.

(2) The mime types for the .c and .h files are now set to text/plain on
<http://www.ioccc.org>.

(3) I (Simon) have added a link to the winning entry that generates the
current logo.

~~~
lifthrasiir
Oh, thank you a lot! Should have sent emails before, but I always forget...

------
VMG
So - where is the code?

~~~
dbaupp
I wondered that too. But in the news section[1] of the front page:

 _The winning source will be released later this year after the winners have
reviewed the writeup of their entries._

[1]: <http://www.ioccc.org/index.html#news>

~~~
tisme
The whole fun of the ioccc is to go through the code and figure out how it is
done. Without the code this is a non-event.

~~~
pmr_
Reading the write-up in combination with the code is usually really
entertaining. Having the code before that would make it a lot less
entertaining. But you are of course right, as long as there is no code, there
isn't much to actually see here.

