Meta-Level Compilation project / Introspector/ AST access / Licensing question

[James Michael DuPont]

> I seem to remember this same discussion a month or
> two ago.  It didn't
> lead anywhere then either, and it has nothing to do
> with the topic of
> this list.  
Really? The interfaces of the gcc is not a topic? 

This is going towards the opening up of the interfaces
of the gcc, that is very important.
This list is for the further development of the gcc,
I have been working on it as well and have a right to
raise my issues and have them resolved. 

I am not going away untill they are.

>It would be nice if it could just stop,
> or move to
> wherever it does belong.
I have discussed it elsewhere, I am bringing back the
conclusions and the idea gained outside.

Yes, this discussion is going for a long time.

All I want is a clear statement on my project so I can
continue: 

Something like :
1. XML and SQL is ok.
2. Embedding a language is OK.
3. XML and SQL is not OK, embedding a language is not
OK, but only if stanford does it!
4. Making a perl module is ok.
5. SQL is not ok, but GDBM is ok?

Come on guys, get real!
when can we have a bit of fairness here?

mike

=====
James Michael DuPont

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com