892
Its not wrong though
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
892 points (100.0% liked)
Programmer Humor
25495 readers
1587 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
No, it is wrong. Machine code is not source code.
And even if you had the source code it may not necessarily qualify as open source.
A decompiler doesnt give you access to the comments, variable names, which is an important part of every source code
But it is extremely time-consuming. Open source code makes it transparent and easy to read, that's what it is about: transparency
A decompiler won't give you the source code. Just some code that might not even necessarily work when compiled back.
From the point of view of the decompiler machine code is indeed the source code though
Try converting from English to Japanese and back to English.
A fancy way to say do nothing is not the same as translating back and forth. Example: Show me the intermediate translation.
Also we live in a 64bit world now old man
Still not the actual source code, bucko.
Having access to the source code actually makes reading machine code easier, so you're also wrong on this entirely different thing you're going on about.
well assembly is technically "source code" and can be 1:1 translated to and from binary, excluding "syntactic sugar" stuff like macros and labels added on top.
The code is produced by the compiler but they are not the original source. To qualify as source code it needs to be in the original language it was written in and a one for one copy. Calling compiler produced assembly source code is wrong as it isn't what the author wrote and their could be many versions of it depending on architecture.
But those things you're excluding are the most important parts of the source code...
By excluded he means macro assemblers which in my mind do qualify as an actual langauge as they have more complicated syntax than instruction arg1, arg2 ...