|Re: Encripted source as an ANDF firstname.lastname@example.org (1989-05-20)|
|Re: Encripted source as an ANDF albaugh@dms.UUCP (1989-05-23)|
|Re: Encripted source as an ANDF email@example.com (1989-05-24)|
|Re: Encripted source as an ANDF harvard!cs.utah.edu!esunix!bpendlet (1989-05-24)|
|Re: Encripted source as an ANDF firstname.lastname@example.org (1989-05-24)|
|Re: Encripted source as an ANDF email@example.com (1989-05-24)|
|Re: Encripted source as an ANDF firstname.lastname@example.org (1989-05-27)|
|Re: encripted source as an ANDF email@example.com (1989-05-27)|
|Re: Encripted source as an ANDF firstname.lastname@example.org (1989-05-30)|
|Re: encripted source as an ANDF email@example.com (1989-05-31)|
|Date:||Wed, 24 May 89 16:12:12 PDT|
|From:||firstname.lastname@example.org (Jeff Bowden)|
In article <email@example.com> firstname.lastname@example.org (Henry Spencer) writes:
>PROBLEM: what to do about things like putc(), which are macros
I was going to post this objection. Since Mr. Spencer beat me to it, I will
offer a solution (so someone else can tear *it* apart).
1) Write a preprocessor which, in addition to obfuscating,
replaces #include<foo.h> with some goop that cpp will leave alone but will
indicate the name (e.g. extern int _foo_h();)
2) Run the result through cpp.
3) Write a post processor which replaces the goop with the original #include
4) Ship product to customers.
One of the earlier poster mentioned transforming the source by changing
control structures into gotos. This might work but I would guess that some
optimizing compilers might lobotomize themselves temporarily when they find
code with gotos in it (perhaps because it's not worth the effort to optimize
code with little-used language features, especially when they have all sorts
of hairy implications.) [Direct "goto" flames to /dev/tty. Amuse yourself.]
"It has been discovered that C++ provides a remarkable facility for concealing
the trivial details of a program - such as where its bugs are."
[Rediscovering the structure of code written with gotos isn't all that hard,
and is quite common in Fortran compilers where you don't have much choice.
But it's true, it makes the ANDF back end harder than it has to be. -John]
[From email@example.com (Jeff Bowden)]
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.