On Friday 30 November 2001 03:13, John Hasler wrote: > csj writes: > > We rarely get to see the source code for a novel. > > Just as well, since none of us have the compiler anyway.
Well, I'm trying to compile my first novel using Abiword ;-) > > The source for a novel is the writer's draft or revision marks. > > When you release Free Software do you include all your "drafts" and > "revision marks" with the source? > Not drafts, but the /*comments*/ on well-maintained source. These comments are useless to the compiler. But helpful to the human who wants to improve or learn from it. I would also add to this good variable names, etc. > You need source code in order to be able to produce derivatives of a > program because compilation is a one-way hash. When you've got a > human-readable copy of a novel you have everything you need to be > able to produce derivatives. Derivatives of whatever quality, yes. You can do the same with reverse-engineering Windows XP. But to carry my analogy further, there are species of readers who do have access to the source code for a novel. They're called critics, though they're more bug-busters than creative hackers. -- Sir Isaac Newton: "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
