[Introspector-developers] Re: A threat to Free Software? The "GCC Introspector".

[James M. D. <mdu...@ya...>]

Thank you for writing back Akim, 
I understand your comments now much better. I hope that you find much
more interesting things happening in the future.

BTW: just for your information, the microsoft shared source CLI
implementation AKA rotor would also very well be a vicitm of
introspector infection, as well as tools like GraphVIZ. 

The ideas that any open source program can be extended/infected to
include an introspector import and export routine is very simple. 

It does not reduce the value of the program to the users, but increases
it, it does however marginalize the value of the program to the
developers, only however if they are using unfair practices to try and
lock in the users. 

This is the case that I see as happing in the gcc and the
dotgnu(tm)/pnet(tm) itself.

mike

I have included your full replay in the mail so I dont have to approve
it.
--- Akim Demaille <ak...@ep...> wrote:
> 
>  > --- Akim Demaille <ak...@ep...> wrote:
>  >> 
>  >> > Funny how a remark about the introspector has landed in Akims
>  >> teaching
>  >> > material 
>  >> 
>  >> >> {"remark"}: A threat
>  >> >> to Free Software? The "GCC Introspector".
>  >> 
>  >
>
http://www.lrde.epita.fr/cgi-bin/twiki/view/Main/CompilationLectureLog
>  >> 
>  >> I wrote it, so that's to be expected :)
> 
>  > Please do you care to comment on this? 
> 
> I'm teaching the implications of what the introspector is.  As you
> certainly noticed, there _is_ a question mark on the slide: what I
> tell to them is both opinions, yours and the FSF's, about this, but
> anyway the purpose is more about the techniques.
> 
>  > I dont think the introspector is a threat Free Software,
>  > it is a threat to the monopoly of the few elite on the GCC
> software,
>  > it is a threat to the people who have forgotten about the spirit
> of GNU
>  > manifesto. The introspector is under the GPL and are all its 
> parts.
> 
> I hear you.  I hear them.
> 
>  > You could also say that parrot or dotgnu or www.tunes.org is a
> threat,
>  > because they are providing a standard file format and language for
>  > metaprogramming at a higher or lower level.
> 
>  > For example : 
>  > GNU FUD : http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-08/msg01136.html
> 
> Indeed, you're extending my slides.  Thanks ;)
> 
> 
>  > I think that the influence of money and fame has corrupted many
>  > free software developers to try and protect their code from being
>  > documented and understood for the wrong reasons.
> 
> Wow!
> 
>  > I also think that the introspector opens the software not up to
>  > non-free software, but to a whole new paradigma of
> metaprogramming,
>  > much like the tunes project.
> 
> Which is much more what I'm interested in anyway.
> 
>  > Remember, more non-free software tools use the gcc
>  > -fdump-translation-unit function because it does not require
>  > patches to the compiler. More non-free software is supported
>  > indirectly by that than the introspector.
> 
> Thanks a lot for your input.  Rest assured that I saved this message
> and will expose your claims next year.


=====
James Michael DuPont
http://introspector.sourceforge.net/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com