Re: about Octave's syntax

[Jaroslav Hajek]

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Sergei Steshenko<address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Søren Hauberg <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> From: Søren Hauberg <address@hidden>
>> Subject: Re: about Octave's syntax
>> To: "Sergei Steshenko" <address@hidden>
>> Cc: "Eduardo Alejandro Cuesta Llanes" <address@hidden>, address@hidden
>> Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 1:20 AM
>> tor, 02 07 2009 kl. 00:08 -0700,
>> skrev Sergei Steshenko:
>> > --- On Wed, 7/1/09, Søren Hauberg <address@hidden>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > From: Søren Hauberg <address@hidden>
>> > > Subject: Re: about Octave's syntax
>> > > To: "Eduardo Alejandro Cuesta Llanes" <address@hidden>
>> > > Cc: address@hidden
>> > > Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2009, 12:44 PM
>> > > ons, 01 07 2009 kl. 10:16 -0400,
>> > > skrev Eduardo Alejandro Cuesta Llanes:
>> > > > I need the formal Octave's syntax for make
>> a
>> > > parser...
>> > >
>> > > Well, you do have access to the source code, so
>> why not
>> > > just inspect the
>> > > code for the actual parser? Or perhaps just use
>> the parser
>> > > instead of
>> > > writing your own...
>> > >
>> > > Søren
>> > >
>> >
>> > Or perhaps never-ever look into 'octave' source code
>> in order to never be
>> > accused of violating GPL ...
>>
>> Is that a flame-bait? I'll bite anyway... It is trivial to
>> avoid
>> violating the GPL: just release your code! If you somehow
>> oppose the
>> GPL, then I don't see why you would use Octave or why
>> anybody here would
>> want to help you.
>>
>> Søren
>>
>>
>
> Suppose the person writes a syntax-highlighting plugin for a BSD-licensed
> editor, and the person wants both the plugin and the editor to remain
> BSD-licensed.
>
> Or not an editor, but an IDE.
>

IIRC, the license issues of BSD vs. GPL are fairly clear and well
documented. A derivative work combining GPL and BSD must be under GPL.
If you don't like it, don't make a derivative work - there are plenty
of options.

>
> A tool that helps to use 'octave' should not necessarily be GPL'ed. And
> if the tool helps to use 'octave', 'octave' benefits, doesn't it ?
>

Not necessarily. Merely using Octave brings no benefit. It always
requires a bit more.

>
> Or GPL people are of the "who is not with us is against us" kind ?
>

Who are GPL people?

>
> Seriously, it's not a good thing to derive spec from code - regardless of
> tool and license.
>

Obviously, most of the Octave language was derived from Matlab. I
don't think the formal grammar for the latter was ever published.

-- 
RNDr. Jaroslav Hajek
computing expert & GNU Octave developer
Aeronautical Research and Test Institute (VZLU)
Prague, Czech Republic
url: www.highegg.matfyz.cz