Love poem in code for a Grooms Cake


#1

Hi all,

I am engaged to a programmer. I, however, know very little about code
other than to always comment! Was hoping to have a surprise grooms cake
for our wedding with maybe a simple love poem in code written on it. He
likes writing in Ruby, Perl, etc. (He is a fan of object-oriented and
also of open source). He also has to write in C or C++ for his job.

Anyway, I was wondering if anyone who sees this post would know of any
“love poems” in a language like one of these. Like love in a forever
loop? Ha, does that even make any sense?

I suppose if I can’t find this, I can just get a cake in the shape of
Tux.

I apologize if this is not using the forum appropriately, but don’t
really know where else to ask.

Thanks!

P.S. Please no VB. :slight_smile:


#2

2009/3/21 Jen S. removed_email_address@domain.invalid

loop? Ha, does that even make any sense?

I suppose if I can’t find this, I can just get a cake in the shape of
Tux.

I apologize if this is not using the forum appropriately, but don’t
really know where else to ask.

Well I’m no poet but this is valid Ruby code:

i do
promise_to_love you until death.parts us
end


#3

Hi Jen, what do you think of:

while(true) I.love(you)
end

Nicolai


#4

Nicolai Reuschling wrote:

Hi Jen, what do you think of:

while(true) I.love(you)
end

Nicolai

Hi Nicolai and everyone.

Thanks for the ideas, but since I don’t actually know code, could you
include a short description of what the code says/means? The two posted
are nice and short, I just honestly don’t quite know what they mean. Or
if they are simply rhyming in code that is not actually executable,
that’s okay too. Thanks!!


#5

Codeblogger wrote:

Hi Jen, what do you think of:

while(true) I.love(you)
end

Let’s make it a one-liner.

I.love(you) while true

Another idea:

I.love(you) until death do |us|
part
end

Regards,

Dan


#6

On Mar 21, 10:16 am, Daniel B. removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

Another idea:

I.love(you) until death do |us|
part
end

BTW, this isn’t “real” code, though it’s legal syntax.

Regards,

Dan


#7

Hi Jen,
I didn’t even notice the rhyme.
Even better I think. :slight_smile:

while(true)

I.love(you)

end

It’s basically an infinite loop and it’s simply two objects (“I” and
“you”)
combined by the verb/method “love”.
And: Yes, it’s actual code.

Glad to be of help!

Nicolai


#8

Jen S. wrote:

Anyway, I was wondering if anyone who sees this post would know of any
“love poems” in a language like one of these. Like love in a forever
loop? Ha, does that even make any sense?

Weird! :stuck_out_tongue:

loop do
p [“Jen”, “YourFiancéName”].inject{ |i, you| i + " loves " + you }
end

Replace YourFiancéName accordingly. This small piece of code forever
injects loves between your fiancé and you. :wink: As a bonus, it would
output to screen “Jen loves YourFiancéName”. A touch of subtlety is
always nice.

Best wishes for your marriage.

Regards,
Ian


#9

Codeblogger removed_email_address@domain.invalid writes:

It’s basically an infinite loop and it’s simply two objects (“I” and “you”)
combined by the verb/method “love”.
And: Yes, it’s actual code.

Not really:

irb(main):208:0> while(true)
                     I.love(you)
                 end
NameError: uninitialized constant I
    from (irb):210
    from .:0

Rather try:

class Person
  attr_accessor :name
  def initialize(name)
     @name=name
  end
  def love(otherPerson)
     puts self.name+" loves "+otherPerson.name+"\n"
  end
end

I=Person.new("Jen S.")
you=Person.new("a programmer")
while true
  I.love(you)
end

-->
Jen S. loves a programmer
Jen S. loves a programmer
Jen S. loves a programmer
Jen S. loves a programmer
Jen S. loves a programmer
Jen S. loves a programmer
Jen S. loves a programmer
...

#10

There is the shell option:

$ yes “I love you”
I love you
I love you

(and so on)

It’s not ruby, but most ruby people know some shell commands.


#11

On Mar 21, 8:33 pm, removed_email_address@domain.invalid (Pascal J. Bourguignon)
wrote:

I=Person.new("Jen S.")
you=Person.new("a programmer")
while true
  I.love(you)
end

Let’s tighten that up a bit, and remove the non-rubyesque camel
casing.

Person = Struct.new( :name ) do
def love( other )
puts “#{self.name} loves #{other.name}”
end
end
I = Person.new(“Jen S.”)
you = Person.new(“Bob”)
while true
I.love(you)
end

Dunno if that’ll fit on the cake, but it gets closer.


#12

Jen S. wrote:

I apologize if this is not using the forum appropriately, but don’t
really know where else to ask.

Well, you might want to ask over on ruby-sonnets…

Seriously, I don’t know where else you’d post this.

P.S. Please no VB. :slight_smile:

Never VB!

You didn’t tell us his name, so I’m not sure if this will work… Let’s
say it’s “Paul”:

‘Nothing’.between? ‘Jan’, ‘Paul’

Evaluates to true. It means Nothing can come beween Jan and Paul. (Note:
Case-sensitive.) In this case, it’s comparing strings – Nothing is
alphabetically after Jan, and before Paul.

If his name doesn’t come after Nothing, it gets trickier. Suppose he’s
George:

!‘anything’.between? ‘Jan’, ‘George’

(The ! means “not”, but “not anything” is less powerful a statement than
“nothing”.)

You get the idea. Maybe there are nicknames that will work… Definitely
fits on the cake, at least.


#13

Phrogz wrote:

  end

casing.
end

Dunno if that’ll fit on the cake, but it gets closer.

Whenever I’ve seen anything like this done, it’s always been done in C.
Though I’m not suggesting we use C, I always thought the #include’s
added a little something extra. So, why not put a couple of require’s
at the top? Such as,
(require is the statement to include library functions/other modules, so
you can re-use functionality)

require ‘love’
require ‘time’

jen = Person.new(“Jen”)
fiance = Person.new(“Fiance”)

us = [jen, fiance]
love = Love.new(jen, fiance)

while(Time.now < Death.parts(us))
jen.loves(fiance) unless love.conditional?
end

This creates a new ‘love’ object, taking Jen and Fiance as parameters
(who are set up as ‘constants’) and loops while the current time is less
than when Death parts the two of you, it says that Jen will love Fiance
unless the love is conditional, which is funny because I put it in a
conditional statement. It needs editing, but it’s something for others
to build on!

Michael

=======================================================================
This email, including any attachments, is only for the intended
addressee. It is subject to copyright, is confidential and may be
the subject of legal or other privilege, none of which is waived or
lost by reason of this transmission.
If the receiver is not the intended addressee, please accept our
apologies, notify us by return, delete all copies and perform no
other act on the email.
Unfortunately, we cannot warrant that the email has not been
altered or corrupted during transmission.


#14

Probably a little to long…

death = nil

def we® ; puts “ready to #{x}y!” ; end

for x in %w{better worse richer poorer sickness health} do
until death do
we(“part”)
end
end

But it actually runs.

T.


#15

trans wrote:

end

But it actually runs.

T.

I maintain that it should be ‘death do us part’
we aren’t parting death.
death is parting us.

=======================================================================
This email, including any attachments, is only for the intended
addressee. It is subject to copyright, is confidential and may be
the subject of legal or other privilege, none of which is waived or
lost by reason of this transmission.
If the receiver is not the intended addressee, please accept our
apologies, notify us by return, delete all copies and perform no
other act on the email.
Unfortunately, we cannot warrant that the email has not been
altered or corrupted during transmission.


#16

All great ideas, thanks everyone!

Jen