Hello!
On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 01:14:48PM +0000, Jerzy Karczmarczuk wrote:
> Ian Jackson defends Haskell, and attacks Clean for "obvious reasons"
> Clean is not free, etc. :
> [...]
> I am not an advocate of Rinus Plasmeijer, but I use, and I WILL USE
> Clean, for me it *is* free. I find it slightly preposterous to insist
> on the freedom to modify the source code, almost nobody does that.
I have used ghc source first NOT for modifying its semantics, but
for porting it to my platform (OpenBSD/i386). That isn't possible
either with a closed source "free" Clean.
> [...]
> Haskell is wonderful, its authors as well. But the FSF philosophy is a
> bit
> extremal,
Don't reduce all free software to FSF. There's much besides that.
Perl isn't FSF, *BSD isn't, ghc isn't (not even from a license point
of view!).
> [...]
> So, I would have nothing again a commercial implementation of Haskell.
> This might promote the language, facilitate its teaching, and contribute
> to its development.
I wouldn't have anything against a commercial implementation. As long
as there are free implementations *too*. If they die out, I'll
probably not use Haskell any more, as I can't support an old free
Haskell implementation for myself and I don't generate any revenue
with Haskell, so buying an implementation is simply not worthwhile
for me.
> Personally I find much more harmful, and even strongly disgusting if
> not worse, but the appropriate swearwords I know only in Polish...,
> those funny fellows who patent *algorithms*. Especially algorithms
> developed during their work in an educational institution.
Because something else (algorithm patents, an illness mainly spreading
in the USA) is worse, it doesn't mean the original topic isn't bad at
all (languages with *no* free implementations at all).
But, in fact, I don't consider that bad, I just don't use it.
> Jerzy Karczmarczuk
> Caen, France
Regards, Hannah.
