On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 18:36 -0700, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 06:13:09PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> > I just don't want people who merely write a module or class to be
> > able to prevent people who actually use that module or class from
> > using, extending, or poking around
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 06:13:09PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> I just don't want people who merely write a module or class to be
> able to prevent people who actually use that module or class from
> using, extending, or poking around in it.
Sounds kind of like Linus's opinion of close-source modules
On Fri, 2005-10-14 at 02:18 +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 13:08:27 -0700, chromatic wrote:
> > Closed classes should not exist.
> >
> > At least, they should only exist if the person *running* Perl 6 wants
> > them to exist -- never if merely the class writer wants to clos
On 10/13/05, John Macdonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just because you can't make locking perfect does not mean it
> has no value.
Acme::Bleach it is!
On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 13:08:27 -0700, chromatic wrote:
> Closed classes should not exist.
>
> At least, they should only exist if the person *running* Perl 6 wants
> them to exist -- never if merely the class writer wants to close them.
In theory I agree, and I hope that will be the defacto way
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 03:01:29PM -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
> > I think this is an opportune time for me to express that I think the
> > ability to close-source a module is important. I love open source,
> > and I couldn't imagine writing anything by myself that I wouldn't
> > share. But in order
> I think this is an opportune time for me to express that I think the
> ability to close-source a module is important. I love open source,
> and I couldn't imagine writing anything by myself that I wouldn't
> share. But in order for Perl to be taken seriously as a commercial
> client-side langua
On 10/12/05, Rob Kinyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Plus, I can't imagine that a reverser for Parrot code is going to be that
> hard to
> write.
Disassembling register machine code is significantly more difficult
than disassembling stack machine code.
That said, if the level of introspective ca
On 10/12/05, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-10-12 at 21:50 +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
>
> > This has even more implications with closed classes to which you
> > don't have source level access, and if this can happen it will
> > happen - i'm pretty sure that some commercial data
On Wed, 2005-10-12 at 21:50 +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
> This has even more implications with closed classes to which you
> don't have source level access, and if this can happen it will
> happen - i'm pretty sure that some commercial database vendors would
> release closed source DBDs, for exampl
10 matches
Mail list logo
