On Monday, 16 April 2012 at 11:57:29 UTC, Bernard Helyer wrote:
On Monday, 16 April 2012 at 07:00:19 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
On Monday, 16 April 2012 at 06:37:00 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-04-16 04:35, Ary Manzana wrote:
On 4/13/12 9:10 PM, deadalnix wrote:
SDC have a lot of theses, and I proposed a similar stuff
for its
evolution. I think it is easier for SDC than it is for dmd
considering
the codebase of both.
Cool! SDC is the way to go. Let's focus our efforts on that
project. :-)
I noticed that SDC is licensed under the GPL license :( That
is not compatible with, for example, EPL used by Eclipse.
We are changing the license soon, with BSD/MIT in mind. I am
really just waiting for Bernard to make the change, we've
gotten permission from all contributors as far as I know.
Oh god, what did we decide on? Boost?
MIT is great, it is a huge step forward with respect to
commercial reuse of code.
However, Boost would allow inclusion of sources (e.g.,
lexer/parser) into D standard library (I saw it has been
mentioned somewhere that such functionality is planned, probably
by Andrei Alexandrescu). Of course, before inclusion it might be
rewritten significantly, but at least it could be based on SDC or
whatever other implementation with Boost license.
What was the motivation behind selecting MIT?
