• Martin <Martin_member pathlink.com> Jun 22 2004
• "Matthew" <admin stlsoft.dot.dot.dot.dot.org> Jun 22 2004
• "Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> Jun 22 2004
• =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sigbj=F8rn_Lund_Olsen?= <sigbjorn lundolsen.net> Jun 22 2004
• "Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> Jun 22 2004
• =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sigbj=F8rn_Lund_Olsen?= <sigbjorn lundolsen.net> Jun 23 2004
• "Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> Jun 23 2004

Martin <Martin_member pathlink.com> writes:

Hello, I have a question about compiled d programs. 
I am thinking of using D in my next projects. I assume that no restrictions
apply to MY compiled D programs, so I can use them however I want, right?
And if I import the Phobos library?

I assume that no restrictions apply, but I could'nt find anything written about
it. 
So can I compile commercal programs with Digital Mars D compiler?

Answer me please, because I must quickly decide whether to use D or not for my
next job.

Thank you!

Martin

"Matthew" <admin stlsoft.dot.dot.dot.dot.org> writes:

"Martin" <Martin_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:cb9at9$20ms$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Hello, I have a question about compiled d programs.
 I am thinking of using D in my next projects. I assume that no restrictions
 apply to MY compiled D programs, so I can use them however I want, right?


Apart from the usual provisos about not claiming any compensation from Digital
Mars or any of the Phobos contributors if your program rings up your stock
broker
and says "sell" when you were hoping to buy, you are correct.

 And if I import the Phobos library?


Same.

 I assume that no restrictions apply, but I could'nt find anything written about
 it.
 So can I compile commercal programs with Digital Mars D compiler?


Yes

 Answer me please, because I must quickly decide whether to use D or not for my
 next job.


Go ahead. But bear in mind that while D is settling down towards a standard,
there are still some issues to be resolved. Nothing is cast in stone until
version 1.0 is released.

"Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:

"Martin" <Martin_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:cb9at9$20ms$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Hello, I have a question about compiled d programs.
 I am thinking of using D in my next projects. I assume that no


 apply to MY compiled D programs, so I can use them however I want, right?
 And if I import the Phobos library?

 I assume that no restrictions apply, but I could'nt find anything written


 it.
 So can I compile commercal programs with Digital Mars D compiler?


Yes. The only restrictions are that you accept liability for any programs
you create with DMD, and that DMD cannot be used to create programs that, if
they fail, could result in significant injury or property damage. Other than
that, you're free to do whatever you want with programs developed with DMD.

 Answer me please, because I must quickly decide whether to use D or not


 next job.


Cool!

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sigbj=F8rn_Lund_Olsen?= <sigbjorn lundolsen.net> writes:

Walter wrote:
 "Martin" <Martin_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
 news:cb9at9$20ms$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 
Hello, I have a question about compiled d programs.
I am thinking of using D in my next projects. I assume that no


 restrictions
 
apply to MY compiled D programs, so I can use them however I want, right?
And if I import the Phobos library?

I assume that no restrictions apply, but I could'nt find anything written


 about
 
it.
So can I compile commercal programs with Digital Mars D compiler?


 
 Yes. The only restrictions are that you accept liability for any programs
 you create with DMD, and that DMD cannot be used to create programs that, if
 they fail, could result in significant injury or property damage. Other than
 that, you're free to do whatever you want with programs developed with DMD.


Ridiculous. Lets say, DMD gets used to write a library that is used in 
some critical aspect of, lets say, railroad network management software, 
or a piece of accounting software. You're not *allowed* to do that under 
the current terms, even though you are *already* protected against 
liability.

In fact, you can almost only *legally* write trivial applications using 
DMD today, just about anything else can conceivably cause significant 
injury or property damage, through some chain of events.

The boot point is that *you* are not liable, the *user* of DMD *is* 
liable for what he/she creates with DMD. The 'significant injury / 
property damage' restriction is completely superfluous.

Cheers,
Sigbjørn Lund Olsen

"Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:

"Sigbjørn Lund Olsen" <sigbjorn lundolsen.net> wrote in message
news:cba8cc$gcf$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Ridiculous. Lets say, DMD gets used to write a library that is used in
 some critical aspect of, lets say, railroad network management software,
 or a piece of accounting software. You're not *allowed* to do that under
 the current terms, even though you are *already* protected against
 liability.

 In fact, you can almost only *legally* write trivial applications using
 DMD today, just about anything else can conceivably cause significant
 injury or property damage, through some chain of events.

 The boot point is that *you* are not liable, the *user* of DMD *is*
 liable for what he/she creates with DMD. The 'significant injury /
 property damage' restriction is completely superfluous.


What you write is common sense. However, in today's lawsuit happy
environment, common sense is in short supply in the legal system.

If someone wants to write a 747 autopilot in DMD, that would be great,
provided they're willing to write Digital Mars a letter acknowledging their
assumption of the risk.

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sigbj=F8rn_Lund_Olsen?= <sigbjorn lundolsen.net> writes:

Walter wrote:

 "Sigbjørn Lund Olsen" <sigbjorn lundolsen.net> wrote in message
 news:cba8cc$gcf$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 
Ridiculous. Lets say, DMD gets used to write a library that is used in
some critical aspect of, lets say, railroad network management software,
or a piece of accounting software. You're not *allowed* to do that under
the current terms, even though you are *already* protected against
liability.

In fact, you can almost only *legally* write trivial applications using
DMD today, just about anything else can conceivably cause significant
injury or property damage, through some chain of events.

The boot point is that *you* are not liable, the *user* of DMD *is*
liable for what he/she creates with DMD. The 'significant injury /
property damage' restriction is completely superfluous.


 
 What you write is common sense. However, in today's lawsuit happy
 environment, common sense is in short supply in the legal system.
 
 If someone wants to write a 747 autopilot in DMD, that would be great,
 provided they're willing to write Digital Mars a letter acknowledging their
 assumption of the risk.


So if I sent you a letter explicitly stating that:

* I am completely liable for all effects, bad or good, caused by any 
program I write for compilation using DMD.
* You are *not* liable for any effects, bad or good, caused by any 
program I write for compilation using DMD.

Would you then be prepared to grant a license to me allowing me to use 
DMD to compile programs that, if they fail, may cause significant injury 
or property damage?

Cheers,
Sigbjørn Lund Olsen

"Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:

"Sigbjørn Lund Olsen" <sigbjorn lundolsen.net> wrote in message
news:cbcfrg$tc6$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Walter wrote:

 "Sigbjørn Lund Olsen" <sigbjorn lundolsen.net> wrote in message
 news:cba8cc$gcf$1 digitaldaemon.com...

Ridiculous. Lets say, DMD gets used to write a library that is used in
some critical aspect of, lets say, railroad network management software,
or a piece of accounting software. You're not *allowed* to do that under
the current terms, even though you are *already* protected against
liability.

In fact, you can almost only *legally* write trivial applications using
DMD today, just about anything else can conceivably cause significant
injury or property damage, through some chain of events.

The boot point is that *you* are not liable, the *user* of DMD *is*
liable for what he/she creates with DMD. The 'significant injury /
property damage' restriction is completely superfluous.



 What you write is common sense. However, in today's lawsuit happy
 environment, common sense is in short supply in the legal system.

 If someone wants to write a 747 autopilot in DMD, that would be great,
 provided they're willing to write Digital Mars a letter acknowledging




 assumption of the risk.


 So if I sent you a letter explicitly stating that:

 * I am completely liable for all effects, bad or good, caused by any
 program I write for compilation using DMD.
 * You are *not* liable for any effects, bad or good, caused by any
 program I write for compilation using DMD.

 Would you then be prepared to grant a license to me allowing me to use
 DMD to compile programs that, if they fail, may cause significant injury
 or property damage?


Yes.