[PD] software license for pd general patch?

martin brinkmann mnb at martin-brinkmann.de
Fri Jul 2 13:16:21 CEST 2010


On 06/30/2010 06:12 PM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:

>> imho this would not be worth the effort, and a horrible idea to make
>> deliberatly unreadable pd-patches...
> 
> If you keep on saying things like that, I will make a patch obfuscator
> patch just so that the content of threads about obfuscation would shift
> away from hypothesis and towards real issues. That would be worth it, in
> terms of getting the debate to evolve past what pd-list was saying a
> decade ago or so.

i meant using obfuscation (and making an obfuscatore for using it)
is not worth it. if a obfuscated patch is very ingenious than it might
make sense to spend the time to decipher it. if not, than it is easy
to build everything yourself anyway. i have attached my proof of concept
pd-obfuscator. (only random positioning, but adding deletion of comments
and making cryptic names should be not too hard)
it was quite easy indeed, and i learned that pd is not as bad for
manipulationg strings as i thought it was. and i did not know before
that the (quite powefull) list-objects are in vanilla(?).(they are not
in (my) help-intro.pd)

bis denn!
	martin
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: obfuscate1.pd
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20100702/2a0aca57/attachment.asc>


More information about the Pd-list mailing list