Re: Summary : ocaml, QPL and the DFSG.
On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 10:48:44AM -0400, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
> Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> writes:
>
> > Brian, maybe i was too harsh, but sorry, i don't really like discussing these
> > things, and your last post about the ocaml generated code went over the
> > border, especially as i mentioned the gcc case and RMS's posts in another mail
> > of this large thread.
>
> You don't get to try to ban me from the thread, then reply directly to
> me and expect me to be silent. I've read every message on this
> thread, and had done so at the time of that message. I do understand
> the difference between the code emitted by gcc and libgcc on one hand,
> and ocamlopt and the ocaml runtime on the other. I do not believe the
> situations are as closely tied as you do, particularly given the fact
> that the ocamllex, ocamlyaccc, and toplevel code are in the "compiler"
> half.
Ok, still.
> You haven't addressed that argument, just talked about this being
> analogous to GCC.
Well, it was RMS himself who suggested that arrangement, and i have posted the
thread where he participated, you can go read the whole argument yourself.
Thread starting two parent post over :
http://caml.inria.fr/archives/200112/msg00022.html
Please read that thread, and if then you still have concerns, please post
them. And be prepared to argue that the same kind of stuff might apply to gcc
though.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: