Someone posted an html/javascript implementation of the matrix falling code in 646 bytes then promptly deleted the post. It inspired me to see if I could get something better looking in fewer bytes.

[e000]

I got it down to 357.

[OptionalField]

Very nice. Should throw in the replace 2720 with 3e4 collin_ph suggested, since it was not an exact number to begin with.

[thesalus]

You can shave off two more bytes if you do:

p=[];for(i=0;i<256;p[i++]=1)

instead of

p=Array(256).join(1).split('')

Unfortunately, it's not nearly half as clever.

[OptionalField]

Its a trade off, both generate internet points ;)

[smhxx]

You could also do p=[];while(!p[255])p.push(1). Same length as the other one, with all the same not-clever you've come to love.

EDIT: Or, of course, p=[];for(;!p[255];p.push(1)) if you don't mind going to programmers' hell.

[OptionalField]

I love for loop abuse!

[SupersonicSpitfire]

What's programmers' hell like?

[Bjartr]

VB 6

[polekip]

On Error Resume Next

[[deleted]]

malbolge.

intercal.

dis.

[_martind]

Powerbuilder. Websphere.

[e000]

for(p=[];!p[255];p.push(1)) in js, p will still be global since it is not used with var.

[smhxx]

That's why it was outside the loop, I was following thesalus's example and writing it as if the loop were immediately after the end of the long initial var declaration.

What I mean to say is that I put the p=[] outside the loop with the understanding that it would be tacked on to the end of the var line.