Re: Further on MEX

[Jaroslav Hajek]

On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Aravindh Krishnamoorthy
<address@hidden> wrote:

> Unfortunately, not all buy the argument that source code must be free.
> If by allowing this, we're extending the reach of Octave and at the
> same time ensuring that core parts + toolboxes of Octave don't end up
> being non-free; trouble? (Of course, there's no guarantee that we
> ensure this!!!)
> People I talk to around here (who protect their sources using MEX) do
> not use Octave for the GPL reason. This is a way to push Octave's
> usage to them, now that you've brought it [Octave] in a very good
> shape => from 3.0.x Octave is _so_ much compatible with Matlab.
>

IMHO, unless some company sponsors the creation of such an API, it
will stay in the land of thoughts.
It brings no direct advantage for us free software developers, so we
obviously lack the motivation.

regards


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