on 2/10/06 2:24 PM, Mars Saxman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Feb 10, 2006, at 10:20 AM, Chris Little wrote: > >> There's not much difference between precompiled and encrypted >> code. RB >> would have to be able to parse both (you need to be able to auto- >> complete >> names) which means that RS could decompile precompiled items. > > The information necessary to autocomplete is only a small part of the > whole source code: the declaration, not the implementation. There are > at least a couple of ways to store the the declaration signatures in > a compiled code file without needing some kind of reversible > intermediate representation. Plugins do this, after all.
True and I suppose that precompiled modules would have the same kind of symbol/dependency tree compiled into the item. What I was trying to highlight is that precompiled code isn't necessarily a magic bullet. Precompiled code could mean byte code, machine code or something else. Each has pros and cons with varying levels of security. Chris _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives of this list here: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
