Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!sun-barr!newstop!sun!ecotopia!raburns
From: raburns%ecotopia@Sun.COM (Randy Burns)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Objective Gnu?
Keywords: gnu,gcc,next
Message-ID: <124947@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: 19 Sep 89 17:03:16 GMT
References: <45768@bbn.COM>
Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM
Reply-To: raburns@sun.UUCP (Randy Burns)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View
Lines: 39

In article <45768@bbn.COM> bpalmer@bbn.com (Brian Palmer) writes:
>
>
>In "The NeXT Book" by Bruce Webster, he says: (page 134)
>
>	Objective C is based on the Gnu C compiler developed by
>	Richard Stallman.  Release 0.9 has merged the Objective
>	C syntax with the the Gnu C compiler to speed up compilation
>	and to produce faster, more efficient code.
>
>Are they using FSF software in their product? Or is Webster just badly
>explaining the situation ...  and Objective C is just preprocessing and
>passing C to gcc.
>
>Otherwise Gang, I see a Copyleft violation right?
I had heard something to the effect that NeXT was going to make their
Objective C compiler GNUware. Now this sounds really nice, but there
still is a problem: the NeXT objective C compiler will still only run
on NeXT machines (which have a highly proprietary design). It seems to me
that this meets the letter of the law without really enhancing the 
availability of standard GNUware particularly. Basically a company that
has a highly proprietary architecture (i.e. NeXT) is put at a less of a
disadvantage using GNUware this way than a company with a much more 
open strategy (i.e. Sun). If Sun had developed a product like the NeXT
objective C compiler it would also run on all of its licensee's computers
and would not give the group that developed it the same competitive 
advantage that NeXT is getting.  Personally, I think the Free Software 
Foundation could best correct this situation and meet it's long term purpose
by having a more flexible policy towards leasing out proprietary right to 
modify its code for a limited period of time. A lot of larger and defense-
oriented firms would gladly be willing to pay for this privilege and the
resulting funds could be used for software directed more at academic,
non-profit and small business software.



Note: The above opinions are my own and in no way should be taken to reflect 
      those of my  consulting client, Sun MicroSystems or any of its
      management.