Most algorithms in one program: <westley@starfire> Merlyn LeRoy (Brian Westley)	Merlyn LeRoy (Brian Westley)	Starfire Consulting	1026 Blair Ave.	St. Paul, MN  	55104  	USAJudges notes:	There is a secret way to get ONE of the versions to print out	"Hello, world!\n".  Can you find how to do it?	Try the following commands:		westley < westley.c > ver0.c		westley 1 < westley.c > ver1.c		westley 1 2 < westley.c > ver2.c		westley 1 2 3 < westley.c > ver3.c		Try compiling and running the 4 resulting programs.Selected notes from the author:	This is a filter.  If it is run with no arguments, it copies	stdin to stdout.  With one argument, it ROT13's stdin to	stdout.  With two arguments, it reverses stdin to stdout.  With	three arguments, it does both.  It requires the ASCII character	set, with all characters being in 0..255, and EOF must be -1.	Also requires two's complement (I think).	The source code will run if ROT13'ed and/or reversed, using a	different algorithm for each version (hereafter referred to as	ver0 (original), ver1 (ROT13), ver2 (reversed), and ver3 	(ROT13 and reversed)).	When compiling these versions, one needs to define 'trgpune'	in the compile line.  Example:		cc -Dtrgpune=putchar ver3.c -o ver3	"trgpune" is the ROT13 of getchar(), so getchar() and putchar()	are exchanged in the ROT13 counterpart.  It is easy to see that	this is unavoidable.  I must have a #define for a library	function; otherwise I would have an unidentifed extern for the	ROT13 version.  If I then define this function, it won't link	in the library version for the ORIGINAL code, since my	definition will supercede the library function.  Hence, the	compiler option gives me putchar(), and allows me to use	getchar().  I pass a dummy argument to getchar() to eliminate	"variable number of args" from lint (unless it checks against	the library).  Otherwise, all versions lint reasonably (main	returns random value & constant in conditional context [when I	check for ROT13 version] is all it complains about).	ver0 and ver1 use a range check and a calculation to do ROT13,	while ver2 and ver3 use table lookup.  All versions contain	main() and it's ROT13 fn, znva().  ver0/ver1 [ver2/ver3] are	(of course) syntactically identical, since the syntax is in the	non-alphabetic characters.  However, since one program starts	at main() while it's ROT13 counterpart starts at znva(), znva()	calls main (znva() is also used for output).	All versions use recursion to work.  If the program is NOT	reversing it's output, it prints out the (possibly ROT13'd)	character before recursing, otherwise it prints it out	afterward (or doesn't recurse at all when EOF is reached).	Since most of this code is identical, it is put into znva() and	called with a first parameter of 0 as a flag (as "main()", it's	first argument (argc) must be at least one).	I can't use any flow control.  If I used if(), I would have a	function vs() to define in the ROT13 version.  But a function	called vs() turns into a function called if() in the original,	so it can't be done.  Therefore, I do:		expr1 && expr2 && (expr3=etc);	which is the same as:		 if (expr1 && expr2) expr3=etc;	A/UX on the Macintosh doesn't get this right; it evaluates ALL	expressions if they aren't in an assignment or conditional	statement.  This might warrant a warning, since other compilers	may do this.  I found MANY compilers botched:		expr1 && (expr2,expr3);	expr2 was OFTEN evaluated even if expr1 was false.  I removed	such statements to make it more portable.	The variable names are worth noting:		 'irk' and  'vex' are ROT13 pairs and are synonyms.		'Near' and 'Arne' are ROT13 pairs and are anagrams.		'NOON' and 'ABBA' are ROT13 pairs and are palindromes.		'tang' and 'gnat' are both ROT13 and palindrome pairs!	Normally (!), a reversible C program is done thus:		/**/ forward code /*/ edoc drawkcab /**/	If your compiler nests comments, it will get this wrong.	However, I have made some bits of the code palindromic,	(or different, but reversible) so it is more like:		/**/forward/*//**/ palindromic /**//*/drawkcab/**/	The code can therefore be interlaced.  There are eight	such palindromic bits.  You can find them within the	/*//**/   /**//*/ pairs.	The body of the code of ver0 and ver1 is a large lumpy 'K' (for	Kernighan); the code of ver2 and ver3 is a flat-topped and	lumpier 'R' (for Ritchie).  Judicious use of spaces and tabs	helped here.  It barely fits on an 80x24 screen.  Squint.  Note	that the code must start with a blank line, or the reversed version	will lack a terminating newline.