# longest ungolfable quine [closed]

Create a quine that cannot be golfed. Your score is your byte count, where higher is better. If someone finds a shorter version, their score is your original byte count, and you lose points

Scoring example:

original submission, 34 bytes // score is 34

function(this){self.printquine();}


golfed, 31 bytes // score is 34, original submission is scored 31

function(this){_.printquine();}


golfed again by someone else, 18 bytes // score is 31, first golfed submission is scored 18

this.printquine();


Here "golfing" is defined as creating a shorter version of someone else's source file exclusively by removing characters or rearranging existing characters (without affecting its quine-ness). This seems like a good way to define it because otherwise googling the shortest quine in a given language would be the only reasonable starting point.

Standard loopholes apply, unless you have a creative use of one then go for it. Use this site's definition of a valid quine, if you can actually find one that's agreed on.

• Could someone that thinks this is unclear please say what they think is unclear? – Post Rock Garf Hunter Aug 2 '19 at 14:31
• I can't speak for others, but I voted this as unclear for two reasons -- the first is regarding "chain" scoring. Say that A scores 100, but then B comes and golfs it down to 95, thus B scores 100. Then C comes along and golfs it further down to 90. Does C score 95 or 100? /// The second is the second-to-last sentence. Opening up standard loopholes is almost always a recipe for disaster. – AdmBorkBork Aug 2 '19 at 15:24
• @AdmBorkBork Those seem like bad choices rather than sources of unclarity. – Post Rock Garf Hunter Aug 2 '19 at 15:25
• this might be better as a cops-and-robbers challenge, but with no "safe" time frame? This is why we have a sandbox: to improve challenges so they don't get downvoted / closed. – Giuseppe Aug 2 '19 at 17:20
• I'm actually voting to close as off-topic, because: Standard loopholes apply, unless you have a creative use of one then go for it, which means that there are basically no rules, and this thus has no objective winning criterion. I think the core of the challenge is an interesting play on the "golf" idea and the scoring has potential, but it needs refinement before it fits our standards. – Giuseppe Aug 2 '19 at 17:29

Q