Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!news.duke.edu!news.mathworks.com!udel!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!lovejoya
From: lovejoya@netcom.com (Alan Lovejoy)
Subject: Re: Compiler in delivery mode
Message-ID: <lovejoyaD2z90K.Hpu@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <ab4329a602021004b936@[192.55.204.252]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 20:02:44 GMT
Lines: 80

David Buell (dbuell@QKS.COM) wrote:
>Alan et al:

>>>>A difficult issue for the Smalltalk provider is how do you license the
>>>>compiler for runtime and yet prevent the developer from providing a competing
>>>>product? Where do you draw the line?
>>>>
>>>>(What does QKS' license say?)
>>
>>>Our license agreement states that you are not allowed to use the
>>>SmalltalkAgents development tools to build any tools that generate code
>>>that runs on the Agents Object System.
>>
>>Does this mean only that a "runtime" image employed by an end-user cannot
>>generate, compile and  then execute STA methods, or does the prohibition
>>also apply to the holder and user of a development license?

>Anyone who has a full license to SmalltalkAgents or the underlying Agents
>Object System have full access to the compiler and binary linker (the PIPO
>tool) at run-time. These features are not, however, available in standalone
>sealed double-clickable applications.

So a holder of a full license could develop and market his own compiler
and/or browser for STA?  He could develop and market a full source  code
management system to be sold to other holders of STA development licenses?

>>How  would you define "generate  code?"  Would this  apply  only to source
>>code  that must be compiled, or would  it also apply to the generation of
>>STA  "bytecodes" by other means than  source code compilation?

>In this case, generating code means compiling binary code that executes on
>the Agents Object System byte-code engine.

By "compiling binary code" I assume you mean "emitting binary code as the
output of a translation process from any other representation"?  

>>What about a runtime image that compiles pre-generated  and/or pre-written
>>code? That is, the source  code  is prepared during product development
>>but only compiled as-needed at runtime (assuming  that the   product   has
>>some way to prevent the end-user from compiling any arbitrary code stream).
>>Would such a scheme  be prohibited by the language of your license
>>agreement?

>Applications delivered on the Agents Object System can compile Smalltalk
>code at runtime, as the compiler is included as part of the AO/S.

You said above that "[The compiler and binary linker] are not, however, 
available in standalone sealed double-clickable applications".  And yet,
"Applications delivered on the AOS can compile Smalltalk code at runtime,
as the compiler is included as part of the AO/S." Apparently, a "runtime
image" and a "standalone sealed double-clickable application" are not the
same thing.  So what is the difference between a "runtime license" and
a full development license, and what is the relationship to a  "standalone
sealed double-clickable application?"  

>>Alan Lovejoy | INTERNET: lovejoya@netcom.com | Smalltalk-80 Consultant
>>"Do not go gentle into that good night. Old age should burn and rave
>>at the closing of the day.  Rage, rage at the dying of the light!"

>Regards,

>Dave

>**************************************
>"I'm sure it's a bug in our software,
>    but let's explore some other possibilities..."

>David Buell
>VP, Product Engineering
>(aka SmalltalkAgents Customer Advocate)
>Quasar Knowledge Systems (QKS)
>9818 Parkwood Drive, Bethesda, MD 20814
>Internet: dbuell@QKS.com, WWW: http://www.qks.com/
>Tel: (301) 530-4853 Fax: (301) 530-5712
>**************************************
-- 
--
Alan Lovejoy | INTERNET: lovejoya@netcom.com | Smalltalk-80 Consultant
"Do not go gentle into that good night. Old age should burn and rave 
at the closing of the day.  Rage, rage at the dying of the light!"
