comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Ada Run-Time Royalties - Opinions?
@ 1994-12-07 12:49 R.A.L Williams
  1994-12-07 21:37 ` Doc Elliott
  1994-12-12  4:29 ` Robert Dewar
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: R.A.L Williams @ 1994-12-07 12:49 UTC (permalink / raw)


A colleague of mine has just completed a comparison of three i960 cross compilers
and we were surprised to find a wide divergence in policy w.r.t. licensing the
run-time system.

One vendor charges no royalty and makes the run-time source code available to
aid porting code to embedded systems; another has no royalty but charges a fee
for access to the run-time source; the third charges a royalty AND charges for
access to the source.

Now, the absolute amounts being charged for royalties and source code are not
huge and the royalty, at least, can be passed on to the customer. In my company,
however, the sheer hassle of administering licensing arrangements like this make
me say b**ger it! Our business is mainly bespoke R&D with occasional repeat
orders. Perhaps I'd have a different opinion if we were involved in production
contracts with well-defined numbers of units that we could budget for beforehand.

My question is this: what is the net opinion on royalties for run-time? Are they
a necessary evil, a dying practice or a complete pain in the nethers?

BTW, I forgot to say that, although we took only a superficial look at the
compilers, there didn't seem to be a great deal to choose between them in terms
of code quality, go faster goodies (essential to make Ada83 a useable language
for embedded systems) or support tools.

Cheers

Bill Williams




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: Ada Run-Time Royalties - Opinions?
  1994-12-07 12:49 Ada Run-Time Royalties - Opinions? R.A.L Williams
@ 1994-12-07 21:37 ` Doc Elliott
  1994-12-12  4:29 ` Robert Dewar
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Doc Elliott @ 1994-12-07 21:37 UTC (permalink / raw)


In article <6027@valiant>, bill@uk.co.gec-mrc (R.A.L Williams) says:
>

deletia

>of code quality, go faster goodies (essential to make Ada83 a useable language
                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>for embedded systems) or support tools.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Cheers
>
>Bill Williams
>

Oh no, batten down the modems, tie down the routers!  Put buckets under your hard
drives!  Here it comes again!  AAAAAEEEEEEeeeeeee.....

Doc Elliott
KE4KUZ
Internet: helliott@losat.redstone.army.mil
packet: ke4kuz@k4ry.#cenal.al.usa.noam
The opinions expressed herein are mine, and do not
reflect those of my employer or anyone else unless
specifically stated as such.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: Ada Run-Time Royalties - Opinions?
  1994-12-07 12:49 Ada Run-Time Royalties - Opinions? R.A.L Williams
  1994-12-07 21:37 ` Doc Elliott
@ 1994-12-12  4:29 ` Robert Dewar
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 1994-12-12  4:29 UTC (permalink / raw)


Presumably runtime licesnse fees should mean a lower cost for the compiler
itself, so in answering the question about such fees, this should be taken
into account.




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~1994-12-12  4:29 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
1994-12-07 12:49 Ada Run-Time Royalties - Opinions? R.A.L Williams
1994-12-07 21:37 ` Doc Elliott
1994-12-12  4:29 ` Robert Dewar

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox