On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 01:10:22PM -0500, Joe Moore wrote: > Is indent(1) lossless?
No. > Should it be considered a transformation? No. > It is certainly a trivial "modified work". Exactly. It's a modification, not a transformation. > The tr example (tr A-Z a-z source.c > newsource.c) is irreversible > (lossy), but (assuming the source names don't collide under this > transformation) produces the same binary, and is (probably) just as > readable/editable as the original. (MyVariable -> myvariable) I suggest actually trying this on some real-world code. A garden-variety X client, for example. It likely won't even compile. If it's lossy, it can't be transformation; instead it is modfication. -- G. Branden Robinson | Somewhere, there is a .sig so funny Debian GNU/Linux | that reading it will cause an [EMAIL PROTECTED] | aneurysm. This is not that .sig. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
pgpvCeKENEdI2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
