On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 18:36 -0700, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 06:13:09PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
I just don't want people who merely write a module or class to be
able to prevent people who actually use that module or class from
using, extending, or poking around in
I think this is an opportune time for me to express that I think the
ability to close-source a module is important. I love open source,
and I couldn't imagine writing anything by myself that I wouldn't
share. But in order for Perl to be taken seriously as a commercial
client-side language,
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 03:01:29PM -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
I think this is an opportune time for me to express that I think the
ability to close-source a module is important. I love open source,
and I couldn't imagine writing anything by myself that I wouldn't
share. But in order for
On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 13:08:27 -0700, chromatic wrote:
Closed classes should not exist.
At least, they should only exist if the person *running* Perl 6 wants
them to exist -- never if merely the class writer wants to close them.
In theory I agree, and I hope that will be the defacto way of
On Fri, 2005-10-14 at 02:18 +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 13:08:27 -0700, chromatic wrote:
Closed classes should not exist.
At least, they should only exist if the person *running* Perl 6 wants
them to exist -- never if merely the class writer wants to close them.
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 06:13:09PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
I just don't want people who merely write a module or class to be
able to prevent people who actually use that module or class from
using, extending, or poking around in it.
Sounds kind of like Linus's opinion of close-source modules.
On Wed, 2005-10-12 at 21:50 +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
This has even more implications with closed classes to which you
don't have source level access, and if this can happen it will
happen - i'm pretty sure that some commercial database vendors would
release closed source DBDs, for example.
On 10/12/05, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2005-10-12 at 21:50 +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
This has even more implications with closed classes to which you
don't have source level access, and if this can happen it will
happen - i'm pretty sure that some commercial database
On 10/12/05, Rob Kinyon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Plus, I can't imagine that a reverser for Parrot code is going to be that
hard to
write.
Disassembling register machine code is significantly more difficult
than disassembling stack machine code.
That said, if the level of introspective
