From: Todd Benson <caduceass@...>
Date: 2007-10-13T19:08:09+09:00
Subject: Re: Obfuscator for Ruby/RoR

On 10/10/07, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote:
> Todd Benson wrote:
> > I agree, but then what about meta-programming?
>
> Personally I think meta-programming and DSLs are over-rated

Not sure yet myself, but I pretty much agree.

> I've been programming a *long* time

I have great respect for you!

> Neither
> meta-programming nor DSLs are new with Ruby; I haven't found them in the
> writings of Von Neumann but that's because I haven't looked very hard. :)

I only brought the point up for other readers.  That being, "If you
start treading waters where changeable objects on the fly are the
fish, you better be careful :)"  (Hmm, that sounds a bit flowery, but
I'm classically trained.)

> We programmers have *always* wanted to meta-program and design
> domain-specific languages, and our managers have always had to pay us
> not to do so. :)

Makes sense.

> Then again, our managers have always wanted to have a machine they could
> instruct in English, eliminating the need for programmers.

Yes, dictate and have it happen immediately :)

> > I'm pretty much convinced that code obfuscation is not a good option
> > for anyone.  But, it can -- and will continue to -- be done.  I will
> > look at various tools and maybe change my mind.  I think I still won't
> > understand the "real" economic reason behind such a thing.
>
> There doesn't have to be a "real" economic reason in the sense of a
> "global optimum". As Herbert Simon pointed out, we don't optimize, we
> satisfice.

The million dollar question is who are we satisfying?

Todd