Re: DragonEgg has been revived

[Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>]

Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:

> What I would like to see is an Ada compiler that can generate code for
> a wide range of targets without any GPL restrictions on the generated
> code.

Pretty sure that's called GCC.

People are perfectly happy to use GCC for C-based commercial projects in
spite of the fact that libgcc, and GNU libstdc++, if you're that way
inclined, have *exactly* the same runtime exception as FSF GNAT's RTS
and the GNAT Pro RTS.

The formal position is that the GCC compiler itself doesn't assert any
licensing restrictions over target code generated by it beyond that
derived from the original source code.

I can see that people, especially commercial lawyers, might be confused
about this, especially if they read all the hot air that's been blasting
over this newsgroup lately. It's a good thing that that's unlikely.

Seems to me that one could in theory get over the licensing issue by
writing an independent BSD-licensed RTS. Not that this is a small task;
deliberately omitting finalization, exception propagation, full tasking,
and multiprocessors would make it just about feasible for a small team,
I think. But I may be seeing through rose-tinted specs because of having
based Cortex GNAT RTS on FSF GCC.