3 ms·
> ... people expect that you publish code because you want it to be changed, and not simply read. Browser-interpreted code makes this quite a fuzzy issue. Wha
by Splines 16y ago
> ... people expect that you publish code because you want it to be changed, and not simply read.
Browser-interpreted code makes this quite a fuzzy issue. What are the rules with running tools like GreaseMonkey? Is there a legal or moral line that shouldn't be crossed with tools like GM?
As an aside, I wonder if there is any gender bias in the "publish code"-->"you want it changed" conclusion. I've observe that females tend to state problems in order to find empathy, and males tend to state problems in order to find solutions (of course, this is a gross simplification). Mixing these two types when a problem presents itself can sometimes result in conflict. Perhaps the same tendencies in people sometimes conflict over code (i.e., some present code to look at and admire, others see it as an opportunity for improvement).
- derefr 16y agoI would say "publishing" must always be a distinct step, and that there has to have been a conscious effort of some sort on the part of the programmer to put the code up separately from its existence within a program. However, even if some people disagree with that, I don't think it could be argued that obfuscated code was to be considered "published"—which could actually be a good argument for code obfuscators.