5 ms·

> Sadly it never got a big name sponsor to push it. Has Eiffel had a high-quality open source implementation? My recollection is that Eiffel Studio's software

> Sadly it never got a big name sponsor to push it. Has Eiffel had a high-quality open source implementation? My recollection is that Eiffel Studio's software is proprietary and expensive.

Jtsummers 6y ago
You can download Eiffel Studio and use it for free. I'm not sure what restrictions there are or capabilities that may be removed. It's included in Homebrew (mac) but it's an older version. Macports seems to have the current version available. Not sure about various Linux distros. https://dev.eiffel.com/Main_Page https://dev.eiffel.com/Main_Page
- SloopJon 6y ago
  Here's how Eiffel Software describes the licensing for EiffelStudio: > If you wish to earn a commercial benefit from your application and not release its source code, you must purchase the number of licenses you need for your development from Eiffel Software. After you purchase licenses, you are free to use and distribute your application the way you want (see the end user license agreement). > If you select the Open Source license, you must release your development under an Open Source license for the benefit of the community at large. So I'm still confused about the licensing. For the open source license, is a GPL runtime embedded in the compiled program or something?
  - nine_k 6y ago
    It's not free software, because it limits the commercial use. It's more like Creative Commons Share-Alike license. I remember that back in the day, it was more restrictive. (Same applied to Plan 9, which never enjoyed the same popularity as Unix, even being technically much superior.) Back in the day, MySQL had a license like that. It still should be fine for free software development.
  - thu2111 6y ago
    Why would the GPL get involved? Copyright is flexible because by default you don't have any rights to use someone else's creative works. They can attach whatever requirements they like to it. Here, they've said you can use it for free if you release your own software as open source. Doesn't seem like a problem.
  - hvis 6y ago
    Sounds like a fundamentally proprietary license with a benevolent twist. As much as I like the open source encouragement, this is no way to inspire industry-wide adoption.
pjmlp 6y ago
We are speaking about languages, not which implementations are available. Are there are free tools for becoming a mechanic? No, they got to be paid, either new or used in some form. And yes, nowadays there is a community version for the free beer crowd.
- SloopJon 6y ago
  > We are speaking about languages, not which implementations are available. When it comes to adoption, an area where Eiffel has clearly lagged, the availability of implementations can't be an afterthought; not when you have good, free implementations for Python, Ruby, Go, Rust, Julia, and many more. Objective-C and Swift are interesting languages that are held back by the fact that the best environment is Xcode on a Mac. Similarly, Qt has been plagued by license anxiety for years (first the QPL, and now the delayed LGPL releases). Therefore, I would say that one of the "obvious, non-negotiable things any new OO language should have," to quote the article, is a good open source implementation.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Language adoption was already a thing from 1950's until late 90's, before rise of free beer culture. Even UNIX's license had to be paid in some form, although symbolic.
- coldtea 6y ago
  >We are speaking about languages, not which implementations are available. We are speaking about the adoption of languages, though ("Sadly it never got a big name sponsor to push it."), not languages in abstracto, and for that available implementations matter. >Are there are free tools for becoming a mechanic? No, they got to be paid, either new or used in some form Which is neither here, nor there. Things are different for programmers, where there are free and/or libre tools, and people have come to expect them and even prefer them.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Language adoption was already a thing before the rise of GNU and BSD in the late 90's. I will love to see the world where such programmers get paid 100% the same way they are willing to pay for their tooling. Exactly the same way.

> Sadly it never got a big name sponsor to push it. Has Eiffel had a high-quality open source implementation? My recollection is that Eiffel Studio's software is proprietary and expensive.

Jtsummers 6y ago

You can download Eiffel Studio and use it for free. I'm not sure what restrictions there are or capabilities that may be removed. It's included in Homebrew (mac) but it's an older version. Macports seems to have the current version available. Not sure about various Linux distros. https://dev.eiffel.com/Main_Page https://dev.eiffel.com/Main_Page

SloopJon 6y ago
Here's how Eiffel Software describes the licensing for EiffelStudio: > If you wish to earn a commercial benefit from your application and not release its source code, you must purchase the number of licenses you need for your development from Eiffel Software. After you purchase licenses, you are free to use and distribute your application the way you want (see the end user license agreement). > If you select the Open Source license, you must release your development under an Open Source license for the benefit of the community at large. So I'm still confused about the licensing. For the open source license, is a GPL runtime embedded in the compiled program or something?
- nine_k 6y ago
  It's not free software, because it limits the commercial use. It's more like Creative Commons Share-Alike license. I remember that back in the day, it was more restrictive. (Same applied to Plan 9, which never enjoyed the same popularity as Unix, even being technically much superior.) Back in the day, MySQL had a license like that. It still should be fine for free software development.
- thu2111 6y ago
  Why would the GPL get involved? Copyright is flexible because by default you don't have any rights to use someone else's creative works. They can attach whatever requirements they like to it. Here, they've said you can use it for free if you release your own software as open source. Doesn't seem like a problem.
- hvis 6y ago
  Sounds like a fundamentally proprietary license with a benevolent twist. As much as I like the open source encouragement, this is no way to inspire industry-wide adoption.

pjmlp 6y ago

We are speaking about languages, not which implementations are available. Are there are free tools for becoming a mechanic? No, they got to be paid, either new or used in some form. And yes, nowadays there is a community version for the free beer crowd.

SloopJon 6y ago
> We are speaking about languages, not which implementations are available. When it comes to adoption, an area where Eiffel has clearly lagged, the availability of implementations can't be an afterthought; not when you have good, free implementations for Python, Ruby, Go, Rust, Julia, and many more. Objective-C and Swift are interesting languages that are held back by the fact that the best environment is Xcode on a Mac. Similarly, Qt has been plagued by license anxiety for years (first the QPL, and now the delayed LGPL releases). Therefore, I would say that one of the "obvious, non-negotiable things any new OO language should have," to quote the article, is a good open source implementation.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Language adoption was already a thing from 1950's until late 90's, before rise of free beer culture. Even UNIX's license had to be paid in some form, although symbolic.
coldtea 6y ago
>We are speaking about languages, not which implementations are available. We are speaking about the adoption of languages, though ("Sadly it never got a big name sponsor to push it."), not languages in abstracto, and for that available implementations matter. >Are there are free tools for becoming a mechanic? No, they got to be paid, either new or used in some form Which is neither here, nor there. Things are different for programmers, where there are free and/or libre tools, and people have come to expect them and even prefer them.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Language adoption was already a thing before the rise of GNU and BSD in the late 90's. I will love to see the world where such programmers get paid 100% the same way they are willing to pay for their tooling. Exactly the same way.