Am 23.01.2017 um 01:48 schrieb ok@cs.otago.ac.nz:
Am 19.01.2017 um 02:17 schrieb Richard A. O'Keefe:
On 19/01/17 12:04 PM, Ben Franksen wrote:
Besides, GNU's cpp is certainly GPL licensed; I wonder why different standards are applied here.
GNU's cpp is not the only one around.
I did not mean to suggest that. Fine. What is the point you want to make with that listing?
I read you as saying that it was inappropriate to use any other licence before GCC's preprocessor is GPL-licensed, and I was making the point that alternatives (including proprietary and free) with different license are available.
Right. So my argument about GNU cpp was not valid, since, in principle at least, there are non-GPL alternatives. How does that work in practice? What are people using on e.g. Windows as GHC's C-backend to avoid GPL? I venture that the native (Microsoft's) C compiler does not enter the picture here, it does not even support C90. Perhaps they use the LLVM backend? Cheers Ben -- "Make it so they have to reboot after every typo." ― Scott Adams