The answer to 2 should be that it need not be licensed under the GPL
(I assume this extends to 3):
>>> It means "Any software compiled by ATS should be distributed under GPLv3"?
>>> If so, it's big problem also for me.
>>
>>
>>No, but you'd have a hard time convincing yourself and you clients
>>exactly what the legal drivel in GPL actually means, and many probably
>>wouldn't want to take the risk.
>>
>>Some say its OK to dynamically link to GPL code because the shared library
>>can be independently distributed, whereas a statically linked executable can't be.
You can use ATS in such a way that these issues do not have to show up:
<source-code> --(compiled-by-ATS)--> <target-code-in-C>
The <target-code-in-C> can be generated in a way that neither libatslib.a nor
libatslib.so is needed for the purpose of linking.
Here is a small project showing how to generate target code in C that does
not need libatslib:
https://github.com/githwxi/ATS-Postiats/tree/master/doc/PROJECT/SMALL/GameOf24
Generating this kind of 'stand-alone' C code is currently the preferred
way of developing systems in ATS. It is not just for the purpose of addressing
potential license issues. It also tries to maximize the portability of
the developed
systems.
Brandon Barker
brandon...@gmail.com
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "ats-lang-users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to
ats-lang-user...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to
ats-lan...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
>
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ats-lang-users/74a40bd6-f3be-4ddd-94a0-4865690ad378%40googlegroups.com.