That was pretty funny.  I had no idea about 1337.  

(Must be getting old)

|20n

> -----Original Message-----
> From: squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:squeak-dev-
> bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Bert Freudenberg
> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 6:04 PM
> To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
> Subject: Re: yet another smallest snapshot, and a visualization
> 
> 
> Am 19.01.2006 um 20:52 schrieb Craig Latta:
> 
> >
> > Hi--
> >
> > 	I've reduced the size of the smallest snapshot[1] a bit, to 1,337
> > bytes (actually 1,108 bytes with padding added for humor value
> > [2] :). You can also see a visualization of it[3].
> >
> >
> > -C
> >
> > [1] http://netjam.org/spoon/smallest.image
> > [2] google "1337"
> > [3] http://netjam.org/spoon/smallest.gif
> 
> Way, way, cool. Do we have a tool to explore an image? This thing is
> so small you could have a complete object diagram of it, with all the
> pointers ...
> 
> 
> - Bert -
> 
>