3 ms·

You are correct, but I was speaking in terms of general-purpose programming, with an OSS/free implementation available, and to my knowledge all the other vendor

You are correct, but I was speaking in terms of general-purpose programming, with an OSS/free implementation available, and to my knowledge all the other vendors only target the embedded and high-integrity spaces. And they cost money. Moreover Adacore is the only one to have a general-purpose OSS (albeit kind of captive) ecosystem. Your ANSI/ISO remark is off-topic. You don't need a seat there to use the extensive C++ ecosystem. With Adacore it's either GPLv3 all the way or you pay up. Also, to underline their gatekeeper status even more: they could one day decide to stop releasing their compiler to GNAT, without giving any reason, and there's nothing anyone could do about it.

pjmlp 9y ago
> You don't need a seat there to use the extensive C++ ecosystem. Thanks to GCC and Sun, and later Apple. GCC was a toy compiler until Sun decided to start charging for their UNIX development SDK, which made many companies contribute to GCC's development. Likewise if it wasn't for GPLv3, Apple would probably never bothered to create clang. > With Adacore it's either GPLv3 all the way or you pay up Actually I do have issues with people earning money with the work from others for free without contributing anything back. GPLv3 is quite appealing for free software. Want to earn money without contributing anything back? Use commercial licensed software. > Also, to underline their gatekeeper status even more: they could one day decide to stop releasing their compiler to GNAT, without giving any reason, and there's nothing anyone could do about it. There is always the very latest GPLv3 version, that everyone willing to contribute can carry on using.
- bb88 9y ago
  > Actually I do have issues with people earning money with the work from others for free without contributing anything back. With the BSD license, you can fork it all you want, but you have to maintain that fork. For most people/companies the feature is not a competitive advantage. So they donate the code back, and it means they don't have to spend so much time maintaining a fork. The way I see it is, I'm a working stiff that's used a lot of opensource in the past. I don't mind releasing things as BSD clause to help another working stiff, as long as it doesn't contain my company's "secret sauce."

pjmlp 9y ago

> You don't need a seat there to use the extensive C++ ecosystem. Thanks to GCC and Sun, and later Apple. GCC was a toy compiler until Sun decided to start charging for their UNIX development SDK, which made many companies contribute to GCC's development. Likewise if it wasn't for GPLv3, Apple would probably never bothered to create clang. > With Adacore it's either GPLv3 all the way or you pay up Actually I do have issues with people earning money with the work from others for free without contributing anything back. GPLv3 is quite appealing for free software. Want to earn money without contributing anything back? Use commercial licensed software. > Also, to underline their gatekeeper status even more: they could one day decide to stop releasing their compiler to GNAT, without giving any reason, and there's nothing anyone could do about it. There is always the very latest GPLv3 version, that everyone willing to contribute can carry on using.

bb88 9y ago
> Actually I do have issues with people earning money with the work from others for free without contributing anything back. With the BSD license, you can fork it all you want, but you have to maintain that fork. For most people/companies the feature is not a competitive advantage. So they donate the code back, and it means they don't have to spend so much time maintaining a fork. The way I see it is, I'm a working stiff that's used a lot of opensource in the past. I don't mind releasing things as BSD clause to help another working stiff, as long as it doesn't contain my company's "secret sauce."