Click here to Skip to main content

Survey Results

Do you obfuscate your code?   [Edit]

Survey period: 27 Feb 2012 to 5 Mar 2012

Protecting your code, for example .NET DLLs or client side Javascript, is important for some. Do you deliberately (as opposed to accidentally) obfuscate your code? Suggested by Collin Jasnoch

OptionVotes% 
No, we don't since there is no need51748.00517 votes, 48.00%
No, we don't because we don't care if others see the code22721.08227 votes, 21.08%
Yes, using commercial tools827.6182 votes, 7.61%
Yes, using free tools (or tools that come with, say, Visual Studio)12911.98129 votes, 11.98%
Yes, using our own in-house methods413.8141 votes, 3.81%
I don't know what obfuscating means.817.5281 votes, 7.52%



 
Hint: For improved responsiveness ensure Javascript is enabled and choose 'Normal' from the Layout dropdown and hit 'Update'.
You must Sign In to use this message board.
Search this forum  
    Spacing  Noise  Layout  Per page   
GeneralNo because SaaS makes it overkillmemberEksith6 Mar '12 - 6:12 
GeneralStandard template library!membered welch2 Mar '12 - 10:30 
GeneralYes. I'm writing C++ with templatesmemberCristian Amarie2 Mar '12 - 6:21 
GeneralWe have code which would set the competition back years!memberRoy from Detroit2 Mar '12 - 2:05 
GeneralNevermemberpashad1 Mar '12 - 20:35 
Generalthe "obfuscator"memberMehdiNaseri29 Feb '12 - 16:18 
GeneralRe: the "obfuscator"memberJohnny J.29 Feb '12 - 19:58 
GeneralOption needed - Some codememberJohnny J.29 Feb '12 - 2:05 
I obfuscate less than 1% of my code. Only one or two crucial assemblies. The rest of the code is unobfuscated.
Why can't I be applicable like John? - Me, April 2011
-----
Beidh ceol, caint agus craic againn - Seán Bán Breathnach
-----
Da mihi sis crustum Etruscum cum omnibus in eo!
-----
Just because a thing is new don’t mean that it’s better - Will Rogers, September 4, 1932

GeneralRe: Option needed - Some codememberJeremy Hutchinson29 Feb '12 - 2:20 
GeneralRe: Option needed - Some codememberJohnny J.29 Feb '12 - 2:24 
GeneralRe: Option needed - Some codememberMichael Bergman29 Feb '12 - 8:33 
GeneralRe: Option needed - Some codememberJohnny J.29 Feb '12 - 19:57 
GeneralRe: Option needed - Some codememberBassam Abdul-Baki2 Mar '12 - 5:28 
GeneralNo because it's pointless.memberharold aptroot29 Feb '12 - 0:03 
GeneralRe: No because it's pointless.memberthrakazog1 Mar '12 - 11:48 
GeneralRe: No because it's pointless.memberharold aptroot1 Mar '12 - 11:57 
GeneralDepends on whether you're trying to protect algorithmsmentorTom Clement28 Feb '12 - 6:39 
GeneralNo needmemberMike Hankey28 Feb '12 - 5:08 
GeneralAll of my development is for in-house use or on our limited access websitememberGregory.Gadow28 Feb '12 - 3:14 
GeneralRe: All of my development is for in-house use or on our limited access websitememberAndre' Gardiner29 Feb '12 - 6:27 
GeneralNo, but we shouldmemberDavid Kentley28 Feb '12 - 2:28 
GeneralRe: No, but we shouldmemberMichael Jepson5 Mar '12 - 5:27 
GeneralRe: No, but we shouldmemberMember 38798485 Mar '12 - 6:32 
Generalwe do business...memberVallarasuS28 Feb '12 - 0:20 
GeneralBest WaymemberVectorX27 Feb '12 - 23:43 

General General    News News    Suggestion Suggestion    Question Question    Bug Bug    Answer Answer    Joke Joke    Rant Rant    Admin Admin   


Advertise | Privacy | Mobile
Web02 | 2.6.130516.1 | Last Updated 10 Aug 2007
Copyright © CodeProject, 1999-2013
All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use
Layout: fixed | fluid