aurelien <[email protected]> writes: > aurelien <[email protected]> writes: > >> Fabio Pesari <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> On 02/03/2016 09:04 PM, aurelien wrote: >>>> Sorry, I was thinking that programming language are under license like >>>> software. >>>> >>>> So we can learn any programming language without risk in time to see it >>>> becoming more (close, proprietary, restricted ...) than another one? >>> >>> Well, for starters I would avoid languages tied to specific proprietary >>> platforms like Swift, even when their implementation is free, and those >>> languages whose official implementations have some proprietary parts >>> (like D, whose backend for DMD is nonfree), because that shows just a >>> plain disregard for the community, if anything. >> >> So it is possible to make difference between programming language. >> >> Maybe it should be great to have a table to help people. >> >> Like: >> > >> + as says Kos Ros >>> - The language's standard (or specification) may be nonfree. >>> - The language's compiler or interpreter may be nonfree. >>> - The language's toolchain may contain nonfree things. _______________________________________________________ Language |implementations|standard|compiler|toolchain| Swift |proprietary | | | | C | | | | | Guile |free |free |free |free | Go | | | | | C++ | | | | | C# | | | | | .net | | | | | Python | | | | | Emacs-lisp | | | | | Lisp | | | | |
-- Aurélien DESBRIÈRES
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
