for(;s=readline();print(s))for(;!s[19];)s=" "+s+"\0"
for(;s=readline();)print(" ".slice(s.length/2),s)
main(c,s){for(;gets(s);puts())memset(s-c,32,c=10-strlen(s)/2);}
main(c,s){for(;gets(s);printf("%*s\n",10-c/2+c,s))c=strlen(s);}
for(;s=readline();print(s))for(;!s[19];)s=" "+s+"\0"
for(;s=readline();)print(" ".slice(s.length/2),s)
main(c,s){for(;gets(s);puts())memset(s-c,32,c=10-strlen(s)/2);}
main(c,s){for(;gets(s);printf("%*s\n",10-c/2+c,s))c=strlen(s);}
// A response to jashkenas's fine proposal for minimalist JavaScript classes. | |
// Harmony always stipulated classes as sugar, so indeed we are keeping current | |
// JavaScript prototype semantics, and classes would only add a syntactic form | |
// that can desugar to ES5. This is mostly the same assumption that Jeremy | |
// chose, but I've stipulated ES5 and used a few accepted ES.next extensions. | |
// Where I part company is on reusing the object literal. It is not the syntax | |
// most classy programmers expect, coming from other languages. It has annoying | |
// and alien overhead, namely colons and commas. For JS community members who |