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
Does anyone else have any thoughts of the proposed feature or it the
question can be considered closed?
Thanks in advance.
From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]
On Behalf Of Steven Watanabe
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 11:46 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] Is there any interest in getting pseudo random number
generation using preprocessor at compile time into the Preprocessor library?
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.
Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk