On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 06:05:58PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Bruce Perens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041212 17:50]: > > Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > > > >Imagine a source where all variables are named v<number> and all > > >functions f<number>. Is that still free? Where do we draw the line? > > >When does source stop to be bad style and start to become obfuscated > > >and unacceptable for main? > > > > > > > > This has been handled before. Some people strip all comments and > > unnecessary white space, and make all symbol names meaningless numbers. > > In general it's done by a program, and they don't actually use that > > version of the code for their own work. Thus, it's not the preferred > > source code under the GPL. > > "preferred form for modification" is _only_ a GPL-term and not part of > the SC.
You can keep saying that all you want, but it remains the most commonly used and most functional definition for "source code" available, and I fail to see the motive behind objecting to its use as a metric for determining whether something is source. (For example, it clearly comes to the correct answer above, in the case of machine-obfuscated code.) -- Glenn Maynard
