4 ms·

> Open-source is bound up with Linux and C for historical reasons, and also because the top mainstream languages were not open-source until recently, and so is

> Open-source is bound up with Linux and C for historical reasons, and also because the top mainstream languages were not open-source until recently, and so is disproportionately behind the times. The top mainstream languages (C, C++, Java, JavaScript, Python, C#, etc.) have all had at least one open source implementation for at least a decade. A decade is not a long time in the life of programming languages but it’s also not “recently.”

lmm 6y ago
I'll admit that GPLed Java is much older than I thought, but open-source C# was certainly not first-class until 2016, and IMO not really until late last year.
- WoodenChair 6y ago
  Mono (open source implementation of C#) is much older than that.
  - lmm 6y ago
    Indeed, but it was never first-class. A lot of libraries weren't available or didn't behave correctly.
    - WoodenChair 6y ago
      The original post said languages not “top implementation.”
      - lmm 6y ago
        I said the languages "weren't open-source". The only reasonable interpretation of whether a language "is" open-source is whether it has first-class open-source implementations and tooling. Otherwise we'd say things like "Windows is open-source" because ReactOS exists.
        WoodenChair 6y ago
        Putting Mono in the same category as ReactOS is disingenuous at best. Mono was such a good open source implementation that Microsoft eventually bought company behind it and canonized it (Xamarin).
        lmm 6y ago
        My experience was that you couldn't take a random C# project and run it on Mono and expect it to work. I don't want to diminish the technical effort that went into Mono, but it would be misleading to say that open-source C# worked without further qualifications.
        WoodenChair 6y ago
        Kind of like it would be misleading to say that most popular programming languages were not open source until recently.
        lmm 6y ago
        I don't think it is. What does it mean for a language to be open-source, if not that there are one or more open-source implementations of that language which support most or all of the extant ecosystem for that language.
        WoodenChair 6y ago
        Go look at the TIOBE index ten years ago: https://www.geeks3d.com/20110121/tiobe-index-january-2011-python-wins-the-tiobe-programming-language-award-of-2010/ https://www.geeks3d.com/20110121/tiobe-index-january-2011-py... Top 5 languages were Java, C, C++, PHP, Python. All five of them were open source in mainstream implementations (Open JDK, GCC, GCC, PHP mainline, Python mainline).
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
lmm 6y ago
I remembered the issue with Java; it's not really open-source because it's covered by patents that are only licensed for implementations substantially derived from OpenJDK.

lmm 6y ago

I'll admit that GPLed Java is much older than I thought, but open-source C# was certainly not first-class until 2016, and IMO not really until late last year.

WoodenChair 6y ago
Mono (open source implementation of C#) is much older than that.
- lmm 6y ago
  Indeed, but it was never first-class. A lot of libraries weren't available or didn't behave correctly.
  - WoodenChair 6y ago
    The original post said languages not “top implementation.”
    - lmm 6y ago
      I said the languages "weren't open-source". The only reasonable interpretation of whether a language "is" open-source is whether it has first-class open-source implementations and tooling. Otherwise we'd say things like "Windows is open-source" because ReactOS exists.
      - WoodenChair 6y ago
        Putting Mono in the same category as ReactOS is disingenuous at best. Mono was such a good open source implementation that Microsoft eventually bought company behind it and canonized it (Xamarin).
        lmm 6y ago
        My experience was that you couldn't take a random C# project and run it on Mono and expect it to work. I don't want to diminish the technical effort that went into Mono, but it would be misleading to say that open-source C# worked without further qualifications.
        WoodenChair 6y ago
        Kind of like it would be misleading to say that most popular programming languages were not open source until recently.
        lmm 6y ago
        I don't think it is. What does it mean for a language to be open-source, if not that there are one or more open-source implementations of that language which support most or all of the extant ecosystem for that language.
        WoodenChair 6y ago
        Go look at the TIOBE index ten years ago: https://www.geeks3d.com/20110121/tiobe-index-january-2011-python-wins-the-tiobe-programming-language-award-of-2010/ https://www.geeks3d.com/20110121/tiobe-index-january-2011-py... Top 5 languages were Java, C, C++, PHP, Python. All five of them were open source in mainstream implementations (Open JDK, GCC, GCC, PHP mainline, Python mainline).
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]

lmm 6y ago

I remembered the issue with Java; it's not really open-source because it's covered by patents that are only licensed for implementations substantially derived from OpenJDK.