|C/C++ obfuscator email@example.com (Abbas) (2005-01-22)|
|Re: C/C++ obfuscator lkrupp@pssw.NOSPAM.com.INVALID (Louis Krupp) (2005-01-24)|
|Re: C/C++ obfuscator firstname.lastname@example.org (Walter Banks) (2005-01-24)|
|Re: C/C++ obfuscator email@example.com (Paul Pluzhnikov) (2005-01-25)|
|Re: C/C++ obfuscator firstname.lastname@example.org (George Neuner) (2005-01-25)|
|Re: C/C++ obfuscator lkrupp@pssw.NOSPAM.com.INVALID (Louis Krupp) (2005-01-30)|
|Re: C/C++ obfuscator email@example.com (Ira Baxter) (2005-01-30)|
|Re: C/C++ obfuscator firstname.lastname@example.org (Paul Pluzhnikov) (2005-02-03)|
|Re: C/C++ obfuscator email@example.com (2005-02-03)|
|Re: C/C++ obfuscator firstname.lastname@example.org (Paul Pluzhnikov) (2005-02-06)|
|[1 later articles]|
|From:||Paul Pluzhnikov <email@example.com>|
|Date:||25 Jan 2005 23:23:39 -0500|
|Posted-Date:||25 Jan 2005 23:23:39 EST|
Louis Krupp <lkrupp@pssw.NOSPAM.com.INVALID> writes:
> Abbas wrote:
> > I would like to know if anyone know about a commercial C/C++
> > obfuscator. ...
I don't know of any. It is exceedingly difficult to make a C++ one
that will correctly handle templates, and templates are everywhere
> Is there really a market for something like this?
There probably is a market, but it is probably very small, and the OP
will probably balk if the price was in the $10,000+ range (which is
what it would have to be, given the difficulty of making and
supporting such obfuscator).
> Is SoftICE really that good?
That has nothing whatsoever to do with OPs question.
Presumably he wants the obfuscator so that he doesn't have to ship his
library compiled with gazillion of g++ versions which are all binary
incompatible. Shipping the source allows the end-user to use any
compiler he wishes. Shipping object code with C++ API limits the
customer to using *exactly* the same version of the compiler OP used
to compile such code.
> How often does debugging or disassembly of optimized code provide
For me the answer is: quite often. I frequently need to understand
how some piece of 3rd party object code works (or rather, why doesn't
it work with my code). The *only* way to arrive at the answer is to
disassemble such code and figure it out.
In order to understand recursion you must first understand recursion.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.