On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 03:40:33 -0400, Chas. Owens wrote: >> But the names (variables, subroutines) can be rendered meaningless. >> Since picking good names is one of the most important contributions a >> good programmer can make, trying to understand and change a large body >> of code that has the worst names possible may not be impossible, but >> still is excruciating. > snip > > If you do that in Perl 5, you run the risk of breaking the code. > Anything that used a symbolic reference would break. [snip] This > is why all Perl 5 obfuscators, that I know of, work by encoding the text > somehow, not by modifying what perl sees.
http://www.stunnix.com/prod/po/overview.shtml : Now, I haven't used it. But it does claim to be an exception to your rule. The users manual has a section on what to do about symbolic name construction. -- Peter Scott http://www.perlmedic.com/ http://www.perldebugged.com/ http://www.informit.com/store/product.aspx?isbn=0137001274 http://www.oreillyschool.com/courses/perl1/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscr...@perl.org For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-h...@perl.org http://learn.perl.org/
