Re: GPL and "free" software (was: air traffic control software)

[Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com>]

In article <7fl9q5$ab7@drn.newsguy.com>,
  bill@nospam wrote:
> (Look at how well formated and consistant GNAT code is, I
> think the fact that it is in the public eye, is what
> pushed ACT to do that).

Well perhaps partly, but there is plenty of open source
code that is NOT well documented. The main key to well
documented code is *caring* about documentation!
>
> I find that if a programmer knows someone will be looking
> and  examining their code, they will more likely work
> harder to mak the code better (programmer pride thing).
> I knew programmers who spend years coding, and no one
> looks at what they wrote. these programmer will in most
> cases, not bother too much in improving  their code or
> even how well written and well documented it is.

Hmmm! Well I think I can fairly say that all the code I
ever wrote has been fanatically well documented (e.g. look
at the SPITBOL 360 sources from a long time back). Of
course most of this code was indeed proprietary, and no one
can ever see it which is a pity. I definitely like the
fact that other people can read the GNAT code.

What has been remarkable at ACT is that we have developed
a whole community of engineers all of whom really care
about the documentation and the quality of the sources, and
I am sure that the fact that this code is read by others
and is open played a significant part in being able to
create this community.

And thanks for the nice comments about the GNAT code, they
are appreciated :-)

Robert Dewar (and the GNAT team)

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own