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

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

Re: Mass-enabling D = License question

2014-05-21 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:

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

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

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

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

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. =

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

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.

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

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

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 develop

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 = ... and a

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

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