> I've heard people wax poetic about programming old, limited-memory machines. I wouldn't know anything about those---at the time they were current, I was writing rudimentary number-guessing games in BASIC. But doing this competition entry gave me a taste of what they might be talking about.<p>One rather big difference here though, the limitation is on the size of the code, not the compiled binary. Most of the "optimizations" here have little to no effect on the code after it's compiled.<p>With older computers, instead of removing line breaks from the code, you're doing things like tweaking compiler flags to shrink the size.
This person is also the author of CodeMirror and ProseMirror, the best choices in my opinion for plain text editing and rich text editing respectively for the web platform
I can't recommend "return true to win" (<a href="https://alf.nu/ReturnTrue" rel="nofollow">https://alf.nu/ReturnTrue</a>) enough to learn how to golf JS. I think it's more accessible to learn one 10-20 char snippet at a time than a big project like a 1k submission.
I did a JS1K back in the day [1] such a fun concept!<p>I wonder these days if anyone is using multi-character emoji (don't know what do you call those exactly) to compress more data in 1024 "bytes"?<p>Since HackerNews does not allow emojis, here is a demo of what I mean:<p><a href="https://output.jsbin.com/nebemihuhe" rel="nofollow">https://output.jsbin.com/nebemihuhe</a><p>[1] <a href="https://js1k.com/2013-spring/demo/1426" rel="nofollow">https://js1k.com/2013-spring/demo/1426</a>
See also: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beholder_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons)" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beholder_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons...</a>