OpenEuphoria

Re: EU 2.4, 2.5 and Open Source

• Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com> Oct 01, 2006
• 589 views

Robert Craig wrote:
> 
> Rod Damon wrote:
> > Question. After EU goes open source, will programs written using
> > versions 2.4 or 2.5 also be required to be open source? Not existing
> > programs, but programs written in the future using versions 2.4 & 2.5.
> 
> Definitely not, and not if you use 3.0, or a future version either.
> The discussion we've been having only concerns those
> who might wish to take the (soon to be open) source code 
> to the Euphoria interpreter, binder, translator etc. and modify it.
> Some people think those modifications should be forced to be
> open source, while others don't mind if they are closed source.
> This has nothing to do with those who simply wish to
> use Euphoria to develop applications. If you, like most people,
> are simply a user of Euphoria, and not a would-be modifier of the
> internals, then relax.
> 
> Regards,
>    Rob Craig
>    Rapid Deployment Software
>    <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a>

I'm glad that is cleared up for those concerned, but I cannot understand for the
life of me why anyone would think that would be the case. That is, I cannot
understand why anyone would think that their code not related to improving or
extending the interpreter would have to be open source.

I don't know of any open source (or even any closed source language, for that
matter) that would require that.

--
"Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
--anonymous
"Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
--M. Haertel
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.