Re: about Octave's syntax

[Jaroslav Hajek]

2009/7/2 Sergei Steshenko <address@hidden>:
>
>
>
> --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Jaroslav Hajek <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> From: Jaroslav Hajek <address@hidden>
>> Subject: Re: about Octave's syntax
>> To: "Sergei Steshenko" <address@hidden>
>> Cc: "Søren Hauberg" <address@hidden>, "Eduardo Alejandro Cuesta Llanes" 
>> <address@hidden>, address@hidden
>> Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 2:02 AM
>> 2009/7/2 Sergei Steshenko <address@hidden>:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Jaroslav Hajek <address@hidden>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: Jaroslav Hajek <address@hidden>
>> >> Subject: Re: about Octave's syntax
>> >> To: "Sergei Steshenko" <address@hidden>
>> >> Cc: "Søren Hauberg" <address@hidden>,
>> "Eduardo Alejandro Cuesta Llanes" <address@hidden>,
>> address@hidden
>> >> Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 1:43 AM
>> >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:29 AM,
>> >
>> > [snip]
>> >
>> >> IIRC, the license issues of BSD vs. GPL are fairly
>> clear
>> >> and well
>> >> documented. A derivative work combining GPL and
>> BSD must be
>> >> under GPL.
>> >> If you don't like it, don't make a derivative work
>> - there
>> >> are plenty
>> >> of options.
>> >
>> > [snip]
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Obviously, most of the Octave language was derived
>> from
>> >> Matlab. I
>> >> don't think the formal grammar for the latter was
>> ever
>> >> published.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> RNDr. Jaroslav Hajek
>> >> computing expert & GNU Octave developer
>> >> Aeronautical Research and Test Institute (VZLU)
>> >> Prague, Czech Republic
>> >> url: www.highegg.matfyz.cz
>> >>
>> >
>> > Sp, do I understand you correctly:
>> >
>> > 1) 'octave' is a derived work of 'matlab' - because of
>> the language;
>>
>> No.
>>
>> > 2) anything that uses 'octave' syntax is a derived
>> work of 'octave', and
>> > thus should be released under GPL ?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> Please read the GPL text to find out what constitutes a
>> derivative work.
>>
>> >
>> > :-).
>> >
>> > That was my point - the OP maybe wanted in no way his
>> work to be considered
>> > to be derived works of 'ocatave'.
>> >
>>
>> GPL is (relatively) clear about what derivative works are,
>> and using a
>> GPL software means agreeing with GPL. It's not really
>> relevant what
>> the OP (or anyone else) wants, beyond the point that he can
>> choose to
>> not use the software at all (which is only logical when one
>> disagrees
>> with software license).
>>
>> --
>> RNDr. Jaroslav Hajek
>> computing expert & GNU Octave developer
>> Aeronautical Research and Test Institute (VZLU)
>> Prague, Czech Republic
>> url: www.highegg.matfyz.cz
>>
>
> I think the most logical thing (and OP did it) is to ask a question first.

In fact, he didn't. At least I don't see one. All I see is a request
"I need the formal grammar" and I already answered that I don't think
such a thing exists.

>
> Presence of separate from code language spec/grammar allows (in many cases)
> to write a parser under any license.
>

So what? The same is true if you write the parser using Octave source
code as a reference. What you can't do is to copy (or you must use
GPL), but merely learning how the code works and what it does is your
essential freedom, one that GPL protects, and exercising this freedom
does imply any obligations for you.

regards

-- 
RNDr. Jaroslav Hajek
computing expert & GNU Octave developer
Aeronautical Research and Test Institute (VZLU)
Prague, Czech Republic
url: www.highegg.matfyz.cz