Re: [boost] Is there any interest in getting pseudo random number generation using preprocessor at compile time into the Preprocessor library?

Subject: Re: [boost] Is there any interest in getting pseudo random number generation using preprocessor at compile time into the Preprocessor library?
From: Alexander Stoyan (alexander.stoyan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-08-17 05:35:48

Hi all,
Does anyone else have any thoughts of the proposed feature or it the
question can be considered closed?
Thanks in advance.

-----Original Message-----
From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]
On Behalf Of Steven Watanabe
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 11:46 PM
To: boost_at_[hidden]
Subject: Re: [boost] Is there any interest in getting pseudo random number
generation using preprocessor at compile time into the Preprocessor library?

AMDG

On 07/12/2012 01:02 PM, Alexander Stoyan wrote:
> For example, a protected code has to be surrounded by
> PROTECTION_START(level) ... PROTECTION_END() macros, where 'level' is 
> a good candidate for being random at compile time.

I don't have a clue what this macro does.

> In general, this feature is very
> useful for many code obfuscation mechanisms.

Like what?  Is the preprocessor really
the best tool for obfuscating code?

> This is similar to __COUNTER__,
> though not everybody use __COUNTER__ but it doesn't make it useless.
> 

In preprocessor programming it's not uncommon to need /unique/ variable
names, for which __COUNTER__ works quite well.  I just don't really
understand the need for a full PRNG.

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost