log11@ucbcad.UUCP (06/11/83)
#N:ucbcad:1000001:000:1504 ucbcad!log11 Jun 11 04:05:00 1983 {~ /* (flame on) */ I spoke recently to the author of the Berkeley Pascal compiler (not pi) about a document of his which gives details on the output of pass 1 (i.e., from c1) of pcc. He said that Bell lawyers ruled that distribution of this document to non-source-licensed sites would violate source-license agreements. The reason being that the numbers put out by c1 are #define's in the source of pcc. While (to my knowledge) the document does not quote the source directly, this does give all the goodies away, by Bell's lights (which I think are rather dim, personally, but let's not get into that.) Now: what if we were to assemble a suite of C source codes with documentation to aid users in inferring the meanings of the manifest constants produced from c1? Ideally, this scheme would produce reliable inferences regardless of the values of the constants. Would this document also be in violation of the rules? What's wrong with thinking of c2, et. al., as compiler-writing tools, anyway? With m4/cpp, lex, yacc, AND c2, the amount of drudgery involved in bringing up compilers on UNIX* could be substantially reduced. This could only be to Ma B's ultimate benefit. ~} /* (flame off) */ Michael Turner ucbvax!ucbesvax.turner P.S. Personal replies should be sent to the above account, not the pseudonymous login "log11", under which this submission appears. ---------------- * UNIX is somebody's trademark, last I heard. sendflame: missing closing "~}" (line 33)