3 ms·

> I re-wrote strings a few years ago in C#, worked great. That was at Microsoft, and sadly the code can't be made public. You sure about that? If it was a re-i

by scoot 12y ago

> I re-wrote strings a few years ago in C#, worked great. That was at Microsoft, and sadly the code can't be made public. You sure about that? If it was a re-implementation in non-cleanroom conditions, Microsoft likely don't have that right. Even if that's not the case, I'm curious what commercial gain Microsoft believe they would have be keeping it private. One wonders how much other code of public interest is hidden behind closed doors (and not just Microsoft's).

to3m 12y ago
It's very common for places to claim ownership of all code you write as an employee, both in and out of work. I don't know whether this would stand up in court, but nobody I've spoken to has tried to find out. As for the provenance of the code, it's quite probable it was a clean-room reimplementation. Writing such tools isn't exactly rocket science. I wrote a PDB-oriented addr2line for VC++ a few years ago, and it didn't have any of the original addr2line code in it at all. In fact, I've never even looked at the addr2line code. I just ran addr2line --help and copied the command line options I saw there. I suspect a reimplementation of strings would be just as straightforward.
- kabdib 12y ago
  Yes, it was clean-room, along the lines of "I need a program to extract strings from binary files." I don't think I even looked at a man page for an existing implementation, so the options and functionality are almost certainly different from other implementations of strings. This was driven by Microsoft's hostile policies towards running anything open source inside the company (you have to get special dispensation to install Linux, for instance). Actually looking at outside source code is a big no-no. There has been at least one case of a contractor including GPL3 code in a project, and MS responded by (a) letting the contractor go, and (b) releasing the source for the product in question. [And no, it wasn't Windows]
dTal 12y ago
They have every right - even if they translated the source code to "strings" to C# line by line, they aren't distributing the result, and hence have no GPL obligations whatsoever. By the same token, if they did distribute it under something other than the GPL (which they would), and it were found to be a "derived work", they would be infringing copyright. However far-fetched, it's no surprise they play it safe.
kabdib 12y ago
Pretty much anything written inside a company is born secret. There are exceptions to this, but shipping "free" code (especially from a bureaucracy that is ultimately controlled by people who want to make money, and that includes not giving competitors any advantage at all) is a big political deal.

by scoot 12y ago

to3m 12y ago

It's very common for places to claim ownership of all code you write as an employee, both in and out of work. I don't know whether this would stand up in court, but nobody I've spoken to has tried to find out. As for the provenance of the code, it's quite probable it was a clean-room reimplementation. Writing such tools isn't exactly rocket science. I wrote a PDB-oriented addr2line for VC++ a few years ago, and it didn't have any of the original addr2line code in it at all. In fact, I've never even looked at the addr2line code. I just ran addr2line --help and copied the command line options I saw there. I suspect a reimplementation of strings would be just as straightforward.

kabdib 12y ago
Yes, it was clean-room, along the lines of "I need a program to extract strings from binary files." I don't think I even looked at a man page for an existing implementation, so the options and functionality are almost certainly different from other implementations of strings. This was driven by Microsoft's hostile policies towards running anything open source inside the company (you have to get special dispensation to install Linux, for instance). Actually looking at outside source code is a big no-no. There has been at least one case of a contractor including GPL3 code in a project, and MS responded by (a) letting the contractor go, and (b) releasing the source for the product in question. [And no, it wasn't Windows]

dTal 12y ago

They have every right - even if they translated the source code to "strings" to C# line by line, they aren't distributing the result, and hence have no GPL obligations whatsoever. By the same token, if they did distribute it under something other than the GPL (which they would), and it were found to be a "derived work", they would be infringing copyright. However far-fetched, it's no surprise they play it safe.

kabdib 12y ago

Pretty much anything written inside a company is born secret. There are exceptions to this, but shipping "free" code (especially from a bureaucracy that is ultimately controlled by people who want to make money, and that includes not giving competitors any advantage at all) is a big political deal.