Should LLVM become the default D-lang platform?

[Paulo Pinto]

On 11.01.2014 12:58, David Nadlinger wrote:
> On Friday, 10 January 2014 at 21:00:24 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>> Because Walter wouldn't be able to work on his current job any longer
>> if he looks into other compiler vendors source code.
>>
>> IP laws are always a complicated issue.
>
> Unless you have an actual explanation as to why this would be the case,
> I'd simply regard this as FUD. I see how the viral nature of the GCC
> license might be a problem for that, but as far as LLVM is concerned,
> Walter would even be able to just rebrand Clang as DMC and ship it as a
> closed-source package. LLVM also doesn't require any copyright
> assignments, which might be an impediment for contributing any fixes
> back to GCC.
>
> David


As far as I remember he already had a few court cases caused by such 
kind of issues.

He is the best person to explain such issues, I would say.

--
Paulo