in reply to Re^7: Automatically Converting Perl to C
in thread Automatically Converting Perl to C

> Do you think you're better than Apple?

Do you think the motivations to unveil his "secrets" are comparable?

I mean if you hide your sources on the moon, it's also not safe, since NASA could launch a mission to steal them... :-)

From my observation, for most people talking about obfuscation, erasing all comments already efficiently destroys any motivation to reuse their code...

Cheers Rolf

  • Comment on Re^8: Automatically Converting Perl to C

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^9: Automatically Converting Perl to C
by ikegami (Patriarch) on Apr 05, 2010 at 08:44 UTC

    I mean if you hide your sources on the moon

    The user can't execute the program that's on the moon unless they are there too, in which case they don't need a NASA mission to steal its secrets.

    Do you think the motivations to unveil his "secrets" are comparable?

    Every case is different, but not really. The only secret an application can keep is the one noone cares to look for.

[reply]
      > > I mean if you hide your sources on the moon

      > The user can't execute the program that's on the moon unless they are there too, in which case they don't need a NASA mission to steal its secrets.

      No only the Perl sources are on the moon running on a machine serving processor directives via Quantum entanglement to a client on earth ... ;;;-) ¹

      Cheers Rolf

      (¹) emoticon for ironic alien...

[reply]
        Here you go bringing up the sources again, and you're talking about a service rather than a distributable. Neither are relevant.
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom