The economics of D

[Sean Kelly]

Frits van Bommel wrote:
> Peter C. Chapin wrote:
>> dan wrote:
>>
>>> My only major concern lies in that d isnt open source and is 
>>> therefore bound to walter.  if he goes, so does D.
>>>
>>> Maybe we should get life insurance on him?
>>
>> Is there any reason (I'm thinking legal, mostly) why someone else
>> couldn't in principle independently implement a D compiler? The D
>> community is reasonably large and full of smart people, so I'm sure the
>> talent exists. Right now the motivation for creating a third party
>> compiler is low, but if Walter disappeared that might change.
> 
> An independent D compiler isn't a problem. There are even several in the 
> works already.
> The more likely problem is the D spec: it's copyrighted by Digital Mars, 
> so only Digital Mars (and those it authorizes[1] to do so) may 
> distribute it (and presumably nobody else may distribute modified 
> versions). So until copyright runs out (unless Walter/Digital Mars 
> transfers control of the spec over to some other person or 
> organization[2]) the only option for continued evolution of the language 
> may be a complete rewrite of the spec (perhaps based on the available 
> compiler, but not on the current spec).
> 
> 
> [1] I'm not sure if anyone else is currently authorized; even Tango 
> (which has permission to redistribute DMD itself) seems to leave the 
> spec out of their binary distributions that include DMD.

Frankly, it's a topic we never broached with Walter.  We've simply been 
trying to keep the inclusion of Digital Mars stuff to a minimum as an 
act of good faith.


Sean