On Sunday, 3 February 2013 at 15:07:50 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Sunday, 3 February 2013 at 14:51:59 UTC, Danny Arends wrote:
Perhaps I should create an requirements outline after reading
the source:
From the post David links to:
"2) Could somebody read the source and document the quirks of
the
parser in painstaking detail, so that somebody else can do a
clean room implementation?"
Gr,
Danny
Yes, this is a common practice for avoiding copyright issues -
one man reads the source and provides detailed spec, second
re-implements needed stuff based on the spec without having a
single look into original sources.
Yes, this is what I meant. Sorry, I should have made this clearer
in the original post.
It's not like we realistically have to be afraid of Symantec
suing anybody over that piece of code, but ideally Walter would
be able to accept that rewritten piece of code back into DMD
without having to fear any licensing issues.
David
