Why the DMD Backend?

[ketmar via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 08:14:53 +0530
Shriramana Sharma via Digitalmars-d-learn
<digitalmars-d-learn at puremagic.com> wrote:

> Heh -- fine for whatever compiler tools *you* create, but if someone
> else creates it, and is willing to distribute it under a more liberal
> license, why should you find it unacceptable, I'm not sure!
'cause BSDL-likes allows proprietary forks. i don't trust proprietary
vendors and i don't want 'em to create slightly incompatible closed fork
which is "better". they have either do all the work by themselves and
release proprietary product from the start, or have no legal way to
fork and close the work of the other people.

i'm not against BSDL-likes per se, the only things i don't want with
such licenses are compiler tools. so i'm not using LLVM-based
compilers, i'm not interested in LLVM-based compilers, and such
compilers are pretty much non-existant in my world.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d-learn/attachments/20141203/8f5960f6/attachment.sig>