Compiling
in [TCL]
|
From: rene on 1 Mar 2010 15:08 > So, it is not possible to compile scripts and splice them together? Have a look on <http://wiki.tcl.tk> and search for tclkit in titles. You an provide intereter (tclkit) and programm (*.kit) or put all together in starpack executables. Everything is binary until you unpack it with sdx. rene
From: MartinLemburg on 1 Mar 2010 15:20 Hi, we did something the following way to hold back the users (or other people) hacking the sources: 1. compile a "customized" tcl interpreter (embeded, as tclsh or wish) providing a tcl command to de-obfuscate or to de-cryptify "code" and evaluate it in the "source" context 2. change the sources to be, similar to those loaded by tbcload: "::MyApi::DeObfuscate { ... } 3. obfuscate the release versions tcl scripts via a kind of tool (perhaps written in tcl) producing such source files You don't need a tcl compiler or the AS dev kit, do achieve such solution. The only thing the users/customers may argue about is the longer load/ startup time the application needs! Best regards, Martin Lemburg On 1 Mrz., 20:36, drscr...(a)gmail.com wrote: > miguel sofer wrote: > > drscr...(a)gmail.com wrote: > >> I thought there must be an easy way to compile scripts since it > >> happens by default. > > > But ... compiling to bytecodes will not buy you much. > > > If you are after performance: precompiled scripts take longer to load > > than the original takes to compile, so it will actually be a perf loss. > > > OTOH, if you are trying to hide your sources, the standard compiler will > > not do - it keeps a copy of the source. > > When I distribute a script and the end users receive it, I want to > discourage them from editing it. Plain ascii just challenges the users > to open and hack things. So, I can give them just the compiled script > without any concern. (Not as app's either because these are small > scripts, there are many of them and by themselves alone they do nothing.) > > So, it is not possible to compile scripts and splice them together? > > DrS
From: DTM on 1 Mar 2010 18:27 On Mar 1, 2:36 pm, drscr...(a)gmail.com wrote: > miguel sofer wrote: > > drscr...(a)gmail.com wrote: > >> I thought there must be an easy way to compile scripts since it > >> happens by default. > > > But ... compiling to bytecodes will not buy you much. > > > If you are after performance: precompiled scripts take longer to load > > than the original takes to compile, so it will actually be a perf loss. > > > OTOH, if you are trying to hide your sources, the standard compiler will > > not do - it keeps a copy of the source. > > When I distribute a script and the end users receive it, I want to > discourage them from editing it. Plain ascii just challenges the users > to open and hack things. So, I can give them just the compiled script > without any concern. (Not as app's either because these are small > scripts, there are many of them and by themselves alone they do nothing.) > > So, it is not possible to compile scripts and splice them together? > > DrS Take a look at freeWrap (http://freewrap.sourceforge.net) if you want to produce an executable that hides the source code. It encrypts all files that you wrap into your application including your TCL script, of course. Dennis LaBelle
From: Gerald W. Lester on 1 Mar 2010 19:05 drscrypt(a)gmail.com wrote: > miguel sofer wrote: >> drscrypt(a)gmail.com wrote: >>> I thought there must be an easy way to compile scripts since it >>> happens by default. >> >> But ... compiling to bytecodes will not buy you much. >> >> If you are after performance: precompiled scripts take longer to load >> than the original takes to compile, so it will actually be a perf loss. >> >> OTOH, if you are trying to hide your sources, the standard compiler >> will not do - it keeps a copy of the source. > > > When I distribute a script and the end users receive it, I want to > discourage them from editing it. Plain ascii just challenges the users > to open and hack things. So, I can give them just the compiled script > without any concern. (Not as app's either because these are small > scripts, there are many of them and by themselves alone they do nothing.) This is what the AS compiler is for. You only need to buy one license for yourself. The end users can use the "compiled" files. You can also deliver the runtime (i.e. tbcloader) as part of your executable. -- +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Gerald W. Lester | |"The man who fights for his ideals is the man who is alive." - Cervantes| +------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: ddd on 2 Mar 2010 06:11 On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 13:24:31 -0500, drscrypt(a)gmail.com <drscrypt(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Alexandre Ferrieux wrote: > >> See ::tcl::unsupported::disassemble > > > Thanks, I will check it out. > > > >> If you want the compiler itself for direct bytecode loading, use the >> one from ActiveState. >> > > I'd thought about this, but it is really an overkill. Unless I am > wrong, it introduces licensing restrictions, I cannot redistribute it, > etc. The compiling is for a limited text editor tool and it is really > not worth all this hassle and extra cost of licensing the AS's compiler. > I thought there must be an easy way to compile scripts since it > happens by default. > > > > DrS You can also have a look at http://pdqi.com/w/pw/pdqi/Wize/Wize , which includes a compiler (http://pdqi.com/w/pw/pdqi/Wize/Compiler) for Tcl in a kind of kit distribution for Tcl.
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 Prev: high-water-mark memory management Next: TCL scripting help |