From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fac41,39771953fe5b2343
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,39771953fe5b2343
X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,39771953fe5b2343
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: New copying license for classes/modules: CGPL
Date: 1997/09/17
Message-ID: <dewar.874547577@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 273432428
References: <341A7F0E.66E46566@cistron.nl> <dewar.874242039@merv>
 <341EABAB.41C67EA6@eiffel.com>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-09-17T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>



Bertrand said

<<As far as I understand the discussion, the problem will not
arise for Eiffel. The language is designed so that the code of
generic classes need not be duplicated for different
"generic derivations" of the same generic class
(i.e. different types obtained by providing different generic
parameters, as in LIST [BOAT] and LIST [PERSON]).
Our implementation, and I believe others too, indeed do not
duplicate the code in such cases. Nor is there any need to
"copy the code into your program".>>

I assume though that a good Eiffel compiler can most certainly inline
procedure bodies across file boundaries (or at least that the language
does not preclude this optimization), and this generates the same kind
of GPL licensing concerns as generic instantiation by copying (which is
after all just a form of inlining).