D license

2012-08-17 Thread ref2401
can i use D2 for commercial project?

Re: D license

2012-08-17 Thread Mariusz Gliwiński
W dniu 2012-08-17 23:12, ref2401 pisze: can i use D2 for commercial project? Of course you can write your commercial and private project in D2.

Re: D license

2012-08-17 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On Friday, August 17, 2012 23:12:00 ref2401 wrote: > can i use D2 for commercial project? D itself doesn't have a license AFAIK. But the standard library uses Boost, so it's compatible with pretty much everything. As for the compiler, its frontend is GPL, and the license of the backend depends

Re: D license

2012-08-17 Thread Walter Bright
On 8/17/2012 2:12 PM, ref2401 wrote: can i use D2 for commercial project? Yes.

The D license

2010-03-10 Thread Andrew Marlow
I just downloaded and installed DMD for Windoze and had a look at the file license.txt installed in C:\D. It contains some rather worrying text: --- The Software is not generally available software. It has not undergone testing and may contain errors. The Software was not designed to operate afte

Re: The D license

2010-03-10 Thread Jesse Phillips
Andrew Marlow wrote: > The FAQ taks about D being open source and it looks like the source zip may > be downloaded (I haven't tried) but the warning above is a bit off-putting. > Normally open source can be freely distributed, but not D, it seems. And what > does the license entitle the user t

Re: The D license

2010-03-10 Thread Robert Clipsham
On 10/03/10 14:41, Andrew Marlow wrote: I just downloaded and installed DMD for Windoze and had a look at the file license.txt installed in C:\D. It contains some rather worrying text: --- The Software is not generally available software. It has not undergone testing and may contain errors. The

Re: The D license

2010-03-10 Thread Bane
Andrew Marlow Wrote: > I just downloaded and installed DMD for Windoze and had a look at the file > license.txt installed in C:\D. It contains some rather worrying text: > > --- > The Software is not generally available software. It has not undergone > testing and may contain errors. The Softwar

Re: The D license

2010-03-10 Thread Michiel Helvensteijn
Jesse Phillips wrote: > There is really nothing wrong with the opening of the license other than > it being more direct than any other license. Yeah. "The Software was not designed to operate after December 31, 1999." That's not wrong. Hehe. I still find that part of the license so ridiculousl

Re: The D license

2010-03-10 Thread div0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Michiel Helvensteijn wrote: > Jesse Phillips wrote: > >> There is really nothing wrong with the opening of the license other than >> it being more direct than any other license. > > Yeah. > > "The Software was not designed to operate after December

Re: The D license

2010-03-10 Thread Jesse Phillips
Michiel Helvensteijn Wrote: > Jesse Phillips wrote: > > > There is really nothing wrong with the opening of the license other than > > it being more direct than any other license. > > Yeah. > > "The Software was not designed to operate after December 31, 1999." > > That's not wrong. It isn't

Re: The D license

2010-03-10 Thread Michiel Helvensteijn
Jesse Phillips wrote: >> > There is really nothing wrong with the opening of the license other >> > than it being more direct than any other license. >> >> Yeah. >> >> "The Software was not designed to operate after December 31, 1999." >> >> That's not wrong. > > It isn't wrong, just because i

Re: The D license

2010-03-10 Thread Justin Johansson
Michiel Helvensteijn Wrote: > Do not use it in a box. > Do not use it with a fox. > Do not use it with a mouse. > Do not use it in a house. > Do not use it here or there. > Do not use it anywhere. Your rhyme reminds me of words from the 1905 classic novel, The Scarlet Pimpernel, by Baroness Emma

Re: The D license

2010-03-10 Thread Nick Sabalausky
"Justin Johansson" wrote in message news:hn92uf$2g9...@digitalmars.com... > Michiel Helvensteijn Wrote: > >> Do not use it in a box. >> Do not use it with a fox. >> Do not use it with a mouse. >> Do not use it in a house. >> Do not use it here or there. >> Do not use it anywhere. > > Your rhyme r

Re: The D license

2010-03-10 Thread Michiel Helvensteijn
Nick Sabalausky wrote: > Michiel's rhyme is a reference to, and slight modification of, the > children's book by Dr. Seuss "Green Eggs and Ham" (I had that as a kid). I didn't know it as a kid. But it is referenced so often in popular television series and such, I eventually had to look it up. It

Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-20 Thread Andre via Digitalmars-d
Hi, I like D due to its clear syntax and power. For a business application developer what is really missing is a full blown IDE which enables Rapid Application Development. => GUI => Database => Internet components => Refactoring => ... and a lot things more If I compare the time I need to dev

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-20 Thread John Colvin via Digitalmars-d
On Tuesday, 20 May 2014 at 20:44:57 UTC, Andre wrote: Hi, I like D due to its clear syntax and power. For a business application developer what is really missing is a full blown IDE which enables Rapid Application Development. => GUI => Database => Internet components => Refactoring => ... an

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-20 Thread Max Barraclough via Digitalmars-d
The DMD frontend is licensed under the GPL, which is 'viral': if your code links against it, you'll have to release your code as GPL. Strictly, John is right in that the GPL doesn't prevent you from charging for your code, but seeing as that code will be GPL'ed, anyone who buys it will then be fr

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-20 Thread ed via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 21 May 2014 at 00:16:07 UTC, Max Barraclough wrote: The DMD frontend is licensed under the GPL, which is 'viral': if your code links against it, you'll have to release your code as GPL. Strictly, John is right in that the GPL doesn't prevent you from charging for your code, but see

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-20 Thread Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d
On 21/05/14 02:16, Max Barraclough wrote: The DMD frontend is licensed under the GPL, which is 'viral': if your code links against it, you'll have to release your code as GPL. There's no need to link with DMD. Strictly, John is right in that the GPL doesn't prevent you from charging for your

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-21 Thread Joakim via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 21 May 2014 at 00:16:07 UTC, Max Barraclough wrote: The DMD frontend is licensed under the GPL, which is 'viral': if your code links against it, you'll have to release your code as GPL. Not true, the DMD frontend is dual-licensed, both GPL and the Artistic license: https://github.

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-21 Thread via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 21 May 2014 at 07:50:33 UTC, Joakim wrote: I don't think John was talking about linking against dmd, merely having the user download and run it standalone, which the GPL doesn't prohibit. You can modify a GPL'ed compiler to work as a stand alone server with shared memory interfac

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-21 Thread Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d
On 21/05/14 09:50, Joakim wrote: Yes, but they moved to the UIUC-licensed (basically the BSD license) llvm eventually, partially because they wanted Xcode to directly link against it. I think it's that kind of integration that Andre and Max have in mind, though as John noted, they're not partic

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-21 Thread andre via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 21 May 2014 at 09:25:56 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 21/05/14 09:50, Joakim wrote: Yes, but they moved to the UIUC-licensed (basically the BSD license) llvm eventually, partially because they wanted Xcode to directly link against it. I think it's that kind of integration that

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-21 Thread Max Barraclough via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 21 May 2014 at 01:53:57 UTC, ed wrote: Yet more GPL bashing? This is getting very boring these days. No, I'm not *bashing*. Were I the owner of DMD, the restrictions facilitated by the GPL are exactly what I'd want. I think we're agreed here really, ed. On Wednesday, 21 May 20

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-21 Thread John Colvin via Digitalmars-d
On Tuesday, 20 May 2014 at 22:50:45 UTC, John Colvin wrote: On Tuesday, 20 May 2014 at 20:44:57 UTC, Andre wrote: Hi, I like D due to its clear syntax and power. For a business application developer what is really missing is a full blown IDE which enables Rapid Application Development. => GU

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-21 Thread Joakim via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 21 May 2014 at 09:17:34 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: You can modify a GPL'ed compiler to work as a stand alone server with shared memory interface. You are allowed to distribute it as a binary with other kinds of software. You don't have to make source available unless the rece

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-21 Thread Max Barraclough via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 21 May 2014 at 10:52:34 UTC, Joakim wrote: Other than the Artistic Licence dual-licensing, what did I get wrong? Well, that's a pretty fundamental point, but it was a joke. I think you're right - I'm not all that familiar with the Artistic Licence, but it seems a better fit for

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-21 Thread Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d
On 21/05/14 11:59, Max Barraclough wrote: I assumed we were talking about using the frontend as a means to enable syntax-highlighting and such, rather than simple invocation of the DMD compiler, which of course wouldn't be a problem. I assumed we weren't, since it's not really made for that. I

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-21 Thread Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d
On 21/05/14 12:02, John Colvin wrote: Also, note that linking to GPL licenced shared libraries/dlls/dylibs or whatever you use doesn't necessarily mean the GPL has got you wrapped in it's rather fuzzy web. AKAIK it's a matter of debate and has never been tested in court As far as I know, if y

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-21 Thread via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 21 May 2014 at 10:52:34 UTC, Joakim wrote: I don't know about that last point, and I'm not about to reread the GPL to find out, but sure, it's all a matter of how tightly you link against GPL code. Shared memory, pipelines etc are not linking… If you exchange data you are ok as

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-22 Thread Kagamin via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 21 May 2014 at 09:59:54 UTC, Max Barraclough wrote: Other than the Artistic Licence dual-licensing, what did I get wrong? Syntax highlighting requires only minimal lexer. Code completion should be done out of process in order to easily restart it if it overuses memory.

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-22 Thread marcpmichel via Digitalmars-d
To be back on topic : What about trying crowdfunding to pay a few developers to build an IDE for D ? What about Digital Mars doing it ? Where is the video with Walter and Andrei asking for contributions ?

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-22 Thread Max Barraclough via Digitalmars-d
On Thursday, 22 May 2014 at 09:51:17 UTC, marcpmichel wrote: To be back on topic : What about trying crowdfunding to pay a few developers to build an IDE for D ? What about Digital Mars doing it ? Where is the video with Walter and Andrei asking for contributions ? The MonoD developer is ac

Re: Mass-enabling D => License question

2014-05-22 Thread marcpmichel via Digitalmars-d
On Thursday, 22 May 2014 at 14:06:10 UTC, Max Barraclough wrote: The MonoD developer is accepting donations: http://mono-d.alexanderbothe.com/ I my mind, such a crowdfunded IDE for D, announced by Walter and Andrei, should be written in D. It could be the necessary bootstrap for such a big ope