>If this analysis can cast a shadow on the myth of Mel Kaye ... it stems from the obvious lack of real value that the hack added to the program. It's very unlikely that a standard loop would have degraded the program's performance in any noticeable way.
I thought the original story implied that the primary purpose of the alleged hack was to make the program (a blackjack game) difficult for anyone else to understand and edit, because Mel himself had refused to alter the program to allow the company's staff to cheat?
(edit: blackjack, not backgammon, thank you cassiepaper)
> I thought the original story implied that the primary purpose of the alleged hack was to make the program (a blackjack game) difficult for anyone else to understand and edit
Nah the essay implies it was just Mel's style, due to coding on very resource-constrained systems. So Mel had a habit of data reuse, self-modifying code, and self-constraining timings (from the drum).
That's all true, but: a gifted coder is ordered to make a change he feels is wrong, he refuses, and he also writes ingeniously obfuscated code which nobody else can alter?
We don't know his motives, or if the clever 'hack' was added before or after his disagreement with the marketing people.
The story says "Mel finally gave in and wrote the code, but he got the test backwards". Maybe this included further obfuscation, but imho it's not implied in the text.
I thought the original story implied that the primary purpose of the alleged hack was to make the program (a blackjack game) difficult for anyone else to understand and edit, because Mel himself had refused to alter the program to allow the company's staff to cheat?
(edit: blackjack, not backgammon, thank you cassiepaper)