Posted November 27, 2012
tonyc_76: "Next comes from the result of (11<<1)++"
The Wolfram clue is the first step. It tells you that that particular code is a programming code for (bitshift the number 11 leftward by one)++. The problem is that Wolfram does not understand what ++ means and thus ignores it. Try putting (11<<1) on Wolfram and compare it with (11<<1)++. You will find that Wolfram erroneously give the same answer for both. The bitshifting left by 1 is basically "multiple the number by 2". So you get 22, and that's what Wolfram tells you. However, the ++ part adds 1 to that, so the answer is actually 23. I figured this out by googling what bitshift meant, then doing the math manually myself, and discovering that well, Wolfram was incomplete.
Crap. I worked on this bit-shifting one for awhile and all I came up with for an answer was 11. I thought the 11 was binary so I bit-shifted to 10 (dropping the leading 1 since I was looking for 2 characters in the game code so I thought we were only working with 2 bits) and then 10++ is 11. Then I thought, "maybe the 11 is decimal", so 11 is 1011 in binary, bit shifted to 10110, and then incremented to 10111. And, again, I only needed 2 chars in the code so I just took the rightmost 2 bits = 11. It never occurred to me to keep everything and then maybe in the end you'd end up with a 2-digit decimal number. The Wolfram clue is the first step. It tells you that that particular code is a programming code for (bitshift the number 11 leftward by one)++. The problem is that Wolfram does not understand what ++ means and thus ignores it. Try putting (11<<1) on Wolfram and compare it with (11<<1)++. You will find that Wolfram erroneously give the same answer for both. The bitshifting left by 1 is basically "multiple the number by 2". So you get 22, and that's what Wolfram tells you. However, the ++ part adds 1 to that, so the answer is actually 23. I figured this out by googling what bitshift meant, then doing the math manually myself, and discovering that well, Wolfram was incomplete.
Oh well. Thanks for the explanation. And thanks for the giveaway, Ipopman.