Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > If we take "program" to mean "a sequence of instructions that a computer > > > can interpret and execute", then it's reasonable to consider a font file > > > as instructions on how to render characters in that font. > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 04:21:28PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > Sure, but not bitmaps. Bitmaps are not "sequences of instructions". > > Why not?
Um, ok, then they are. I'm not sure I care either way. Are you now in agreement that we did not need to change the Social Contract at all; and that *everything* that is made of bits is software? I am not interested in a rigid distinction between programs and data; I am (as a general rule) interested in avoiding the needless attempt to rigidly specify everything. We have never in the past had a rigid definition of "source code". We got by just fine without it, we will continue to do so. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
