[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       haskell
Subject:    Question
From:       fplangc-request () cs ! ucl ! ac ! uk
Date:       1991-08-01 15:46:28
Message-ID: 9108011524.AA14312 () kwakiutl ! crl ! dec ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

From: fplangc-request@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Date:  1 Aug 91 15:51
Sender: nikhil@crl.dec.com
To: fplangc@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Subject: Question


I know that neither of the two situations below apply to Haskell, but
just for my calibration, can someone tell me exactly what David Turner
can/will do if someone published a spec for a language FOO that:

1) is exactly like Miranda?

2) has a subset that is exactly like Miranda, but has sufficient
extensions to make it interestingly different?

I would consider case (1) to be a professional no-no and to be exposed
by the usual peer review process, but is there any legal issue?

I would not consider case (2) to be a professional no-no providing
that the Miranda inspiration was acknowledged; but, again, is there
any legal issue?

Nikhil (puzzled by DAT's reactions).



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]