Wow: "Source code is a version of computer software which is usually much easier to read and understand than the end version in a finished product, and could be used to reverse engineer parts of the product."
- Accessible to the general public (it's a BBC article)
- One sentence long (you will lose readers if this becomes a cs101 lecture)
- Articulates why a source code leak matters
Something in the lines of "Source code is the human readable version of the end product before it's packaged for computers, and it's much easier to read and understand. Also, the source code may allow reverse engineering of the product in question" would be more precise and similarly understandable IMHO.
- I would say even that reverse engineering, as mentioned, is not something the layman understands.
Other than that the article was fine IMO
I mean yes. It isn't that long ago that software was sold in boxes. So the packaging analogy is probably within reach of most people.
But maybe "released" or similar would be more widely understood.
> The “source code” for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it.
But the BBC article definition, while less precise, is more relevant to the subject.
For example, it may be quite hard to reverse-engineer a loaf of bread, but reading assembly is actually quite easy to understand what the program actually does.
If you're trying to explain to a non-technical person what source code is, the bread example from OP is actually a great analogy. It's simple, to the point, and almost everyone will know how bread is made. Is it oversimplified? Sure. But that's the entire point of trying to give a real brief overview to someone with no technical experience.
Not bad. What would you say about saying - " a source code is a set of instructions for a computer to execute". That way, we can still keep the conversation (some what) technical.
You can open the binary file in a text editor and it will be much harder to actually read it. Next best solution is to use a HEX editor but having the source code will make it much easier to understand.
(This is what I used for my child.)
> A blueprint is a reproduction of a technical drawing or engineering drawing [...] allowed rapid and accurate production of an unlimited number of copies.
and even if no-one reads the definition, the term is in common use. Spies stealing blueprints of weapons in movies / real-life being an immediate example.
I think the key element of source code is that this is what is written and read by programmers -- it is akin to the secret recipe for Coke.
They would be doing something seriously wrong if that wasn't always the case haha
So yes, never forget...!
Hope that's ok.
All I can say is thank you to danG for implementing expand/collapse on comment threads so you can quickly move on to comments discussing the topic itself.
Maybe it's an outdated type of humor, but I didn't see a reason to stop myself. While this is HN, we can use some old Slashdot style now and then IMHO.
Did you really need to read what source code was again from the BBC? If you know already, great - but if you don't, why do you need to know what a compiler is?
It's similar to their general coverage of the covid vaccine - does everyone that reads an article about the vaccine really need to know the scientific debate, context, cohort data, vaccine action detail? Or just that the vaccine works & is safe?