Are you dependent on English internally? You are a non free programming language.
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:51 PM, < [email protected]> wrote: > Send libreplanet-discuss mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of libreplanet-discuss digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: List of free as in freedom programming language (aurelien) > 2. Re: List of free as in freedom programming language (Fabio Pesari) > 3. Re: List of free as in freedom programming language (Koz Ross) > 4. Re: List of free as in freedom programming language (aurelien) > 5. Re: List of free as in freedom programming language (aurelien) > 6. Re: List of free as in freedom programming language (aurelien) > 7. Re: List of free as in freedom programming language (Koz Ross) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2016 21:04:03 +0100 > From: aurelien <[email protected]> > To: Alexander Berntsen <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] List of free as in freedom > programming language > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Alexander Berntsen <[email protected]> writes: > > > On 03/02/16 19:59, aurelien wrote: > >> Is there a list of free as in freedom programming language? > > Programming languages are not software, so you'll have to be a bit > > more specific as to what freedoms you mean. > > 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? > > -- > Aur?lien DESBRI?RES > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 818 bytes > Desc: not available > URL: < > http://lists.libreplanet.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/attachments/20160203/511f5b72/attachment.pgp > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 21:25:01 +0100 > From: Fabio Pesari <[email protected]> > To: aurelien <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] List of free as in freedom > programming language > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > 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. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 09:24:13 +1300 > From: Koz Ross <[email protected]> > To: aurelien <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] List of free as in freedom > programming language > Message-ID: <20160204092413.17a84073@Emi> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > > So we can learn any programming language without risk in time to see > > it becoming more (close, proprietary, restricted ...) than another > > one? > > Let's be a bit more specific here. There are several potential sources > of nonfreedom in a language: > > - - 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. > > There are languages which are not affected by any of these things > (Guile, for example), there are languages which fail in some places, > but not others (for example, Dlang), and there are languages which fail > in all three (although this is exceedingly rare these days). > > I would say that as free software supporters, the last two are the most > concerning - a nonfree spec or standard isn't something we tend to > worry about as much (since the *C* standard is technically nonfree, but > I don't see anyone in our community calling for us to stop using it). > > - -- > Koz Ross <[email protected]> > www.retro-freedom.nz > If you aren't using GPG, you should be! > https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en. *** > Please don't send me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html for why. *** > Proud member of the Open Wireless Movement. Find out more at > https://openwireless.org/ *** > Proud member of Peers, at http://peers.community/ . We grow freedom. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2 > > iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWsmHtAAoJEJARVr/lAw1AvXMH+QGor39wxywd1XhSoCPXy0Ng > kH/WCaA4wTxUswXbFNCRQyGzz+yRhxN6GwE26iYp65gW3hxeW/9i2L1zxpo4tt/X > o/7f/d7nHPzf8zn4hFayE853ARdvZK+MFVGw68JJYqjnGUiXhDiYccZbnAlOGtLX > NzK/DHGUB8JHx8FK/DL4zcBEz5D9Gi3gezkUGjfDdbZ/1omkzo6HrF6za8FJE1CE > YAl5ZBNeZ9oQzBSDY2qfT9t1izySVq1qKh1cstMYm9aecqQlYhdBlFcwvn+Lni4g > xezkQ/9CLPVqIy/7+2k24Luyd4eJ+vbvf0hp+hzoM3KSTFcdxA8dDuVl//7vZWo= > =xWII > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2016 21:30:48 +0100 > From: aurelien <[email protected]> > To: Fabio Pesari <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] List of free as in freedom > programming language > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > 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: > > __________________________________________ > Swift|proprietary implementations|...|...| > C > > ... > > -- > Aur?lien DESBRI?RES > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 818 bytes > Desc: not available > URL: < > http://lists.libreplanet.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/attachments/20160203/7d0bc31f/attachment.pgp > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2016 21:39:55 +0100 > From: aurelien <[email protected]> > To: Fabio Pesari <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] List of free as in freedom > programming language > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > 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 | | | | | > > > -- > Aur?lien DESBRI?RES > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 818 bytes > Desc: not available > URL: < > http://lists.libreplanet.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/attachments/20160203/b0d9af1a/attachment.pgp > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2016 21:43:53 +0100 > From: aurelien <[email protected]> > To: Fabio Pesari <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] List of free as in freedom > programming language > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > 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 | | | | | > > -- > Aur?lien DESBRI?RES > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 818 bytes > Desc: not available > URL: < > http://lists.libreplanet.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/attachments/20160203/1d40a2e0/attachment.pgp > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 09:50:20 +1300 > From: Koz Ross <[email protected]> > To: aurelien <[email protected]> > Cc: Fabio Pesari <[email protected]>, [email protected] > Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] List of free as in freedom > programming language > Message-ID: <20160204095020.4882565a@Emi> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > Fabio: I consider the platform part of the toolchain. However, you *do* > raise a valid point that I omitted - whether the language can run on > free OSes. While it is *exceedingly* rare these days, another potential > source of nonfreedom in a programming language is not being able to run > on GNU/Linux (in the sense that there's no compiler or toolchain > support for it). > > It's also worth mentioning that a language might have free components, > but those may be second-class citizens. Dlang has two free software > compilers (GDC and LDC), but they're both behind the mainline in terms > of features and are basically ignored by the entire Dlang toolchain, > both from the community that makes said tools and the communities that > support them (for example, Flycheck has syntax checking *only* via dmd, > the proprietary compiler). > > - -- > Koz Ross <[email protected]> > www.retro-freedom.nz > If you aren't using GPG, you should be! > https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en. *** > Please don't send me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html for why. *** > Proud member of the Open Wireless Movement. Find out more at > https://openwireless.org/ *** > Proud member of Peers, at http://peers.community/ . We grow freedom. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2 > > iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWsmgMAAoJEJARVr/lAw1AHwUH/0viZmovi8LhqyIuOhJVwDrg > d9XA0LrCTBdbOLbb3JtM1YidoN2/8PCM6TlH+Aa9VCfm9Ql/1T6uXoHABX5+RxfC > QvgTBEfTZu05UZUQTjZA6C/cmu1HZSIQopxaRH9kF2hi4V8Y9TaZOGDBAwwT+oR4 > /WQ/66us0neDmQeSO95J7EChpAqjMv4UqOb2nh4Wi5pLkC3P7aFD7GSuUDLX4y6C > YADKzoqF+wVUZgK8W/R+Tu4QeZVxOCEaSVymSVu+87QsOb6QX64mFbrUCeNF/APS > gTuz/Qv3X0eQixfRkI9fzUVcHATe+xP9TO4htC/o83DyPQDHomPl94DorFfTYS4= > =63MD > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > libreplanet-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss > > > End of libreplanet-discuss Digest, Vol 72, Issue 8 > ************************************************** >
