Todd Benson wrote:
>>> If you're worried about job security, just
>>> write code that works in a bad style (think really ugly style Perl)
>> That's incredibly bad advice IMHO. The *last* thing you want to do is
>> write code you can't instantly understand yourself after being in a coma
>> for six months. :)
> 
> I agree, but then what about meta-programming?

Personally I think meta-programming and DSLs are over-rated. As frequent 
denizens of this list know, I've been programming a *long* time. Neither 
meta-programming nor DSLs are new with Ruby; I haven't found them in the 
writings of Von Neumann but that's because I haven't looked very hard. :)

We programmers have *always* wanted to meta-program and design 
domain-specific languages, and our managers have always had to pay us 
not to do so. :)

Then again, our managers have always wanted to have a machine they could 
instruct in English, eliminating the need for programmers.

> I'm pretty much convinced that code obfuscation is not a good option
> for anyone.  But, it can -- and will continue to -- be done.  I will
> look at various tools and maybe change my mind.  I think I still won't
> understand the "real" economic reason behind such a thing.

There doesn't have to be a "real" economic reason in the sense of a 
"global optimum". As Herbert Simon pointed out, we don't optimize, we 
satisfice.