4 ms·
You could argue that the license of the code, in this case AGPL, is irrelevant. I don’t think the source code is any easier to read than disassembled output.
by EdSchouten 7y ago
You could argue that the license of the code, in this case AGPL, is irrelevant. I don’t think the source code is any easier to read than disassembled output.
- beagle3 7y agoYou could say a similar thing about Japanese text if you don’t read Japanese - “copyright isn’t relevant, who would ever want to copy this gibberish?”. As people in this and similar threads mention - it is easier to read; in fact, it is easier to read than even the preprocessed output, if you are familiar with the style and concepts.
- gnulinux 7y agoWhat a disappointing comment. This is like saying MIT/GPL/AGPL in programming languages most people don't understand is irrelevant, since most people wouldn't wanna read/copy/edit code anyway. By that logic, there is no value using open/free license in niche languages. Even though you don't understand this language/style, doesn't mean a user may not want to refer to source code, or someone may want to contribute to the project.
- ngnk 7y agothe agpl is not so much about making concise code pleasant for the masses, as it is about making its freedom viral