Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[cdt-dev] RE: [cdt-core-dev] RE: Open C++ Parser and licensing

Title: RE: [cdt-core-dev] Open C++ Parser

Great point, Sebastien.  The following is the licensing of the Open C++ parser.cc file that I've been using:

 

/*

  Copyright (C) 1997-2001 Shigeru Chiba, Tokyo Institute of Technology.

 

  Permission to use, copy, distribute and modify this software and  

  its documentation for any purpose is hereby granted without fee,       

  provided that the above copyright notice appear in all copies and that

  both that copyright notice and this permission notice appear in

  supporting documentation.

 

  Shigeru Chiba makes no representations about the suitability of this

  software for any purpose.  It is provided "as is" without express or

  implied warranty.

*/

 

My intention was to maintain this notice and add in the CPL notice.  Please advise if anyone sees a problem.

 

Thanks,

Doug Schaefer
Senior Staff Software Engineer

Rational - the software development company
Ottawa (Kanata), Ontario, Canada

-----Original Message-----
From:
Sebastien Marineau [mailto:sebastien@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 2:04 PM
To: '
cdt-core-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx'; 'cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx'
Cc: 'John Duimovich'
Subject: [cdt-core-dev] RE: Open C++ Parser and licensing

 

One point that this brings up is the issue of software license. Eclipse and the CDT are under

the CPL license, and any code that is commited to the eclipse CVS repository is implicitely

assumed to be "given" to the project under this license. I bring this up because when discussing

external source being put in to the repository, there are a couple of extra things to keep in mind.

 

As a refresher, let me go through some simple scenarios/rules for licensing (I'm not a lawyer,

so this is my understanding of how things work. I've cc'ed John Duimovich on this and

he may have additional comments):

 

- When becoming a commiter on Eclipse, any code you provide is provided under the terms

- Eclipse now has a requirement on the header to put on source files (see the eclipse

project charter web page). This requirement is somewhat new (a lot of the source

in the Eclipse tree has not explicit mention of the CPL).

- It is also assumed that the code provided is unencumbered by any other licenses

- An example of this is when QNX donated our source to Eclipse (back in June), it was

all donated under the CPL license. The act of checking it in to dev.eclipse.org indicated

our acceptance of the CPL.

- In keeping with that example, one of the files in our source (the "CPLUSPLUS.jj" parser

javaCC source file) was under a license that was incompatible with the CPL. Thus, we

did not (and could not) commit that file to the CDT CVS repository.

 

A couple of points to take away from this:

- We need to start putting the right license headers in our new

source files (it will take a while for us to go back and update all

of the existing source)

- In the case of 3rd-party code (or derivatives) being added to the CDT, we have to be very

careful about licensing. The example of OpenC++ is a good testcase; if any of the

original source (the Parser class) or a derivative work (as opposed to a rewrite) is to go

into the CDT repository, then we first have to ensure that the OpenC++ license is

compatible with the CPL license (looking at the

license, I don't know -- we will need some legal help on this).

 

I know the latter may seem somewhat complicated and cumbersome, but I'd rather we

go through the pain up-front. Doug, if you'd like, I'll coordinate with John D. to have someone

take a look at the OpenC++ license; I can also take on those activities in the future.

 

Cheers,

 

Sebastien 

 

 

 -----Original Message-----
From: Schaefer, Doug [mailto:dschaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 10:56 PM
To: 'cdt-core-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: [cdt-core-dev] Open C++ Parser

Done.  I called the branch NewParser1 since there really isn't very much left of the Open C++ parser other than most of the grammar.  They still deserve the copyright notice for the Parser class, however.  I'll put the new work in the source folder 'newparser' so you can easily find it.  This will happen over the next few days as we clean up our prototype to make it more presentable.  It should be under the tree for Christmas ;-)

 

Doug Schaefer

Senior Staff Software Engineer

Rational - the software development company

Ottawa (Kanata), Ontario, Canada

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Schaefer, Doug [mailto:dschaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 9:39 PM
To: 'cdt-core-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: [cdt-core-dev] Open C++ Parser

 

That's a great idea, Alain.  I'll give it a shot.

Doug Schaefer
Senior Staff Software Engineer
Rational - the software development company
Ottawa (Kanata), Ontario, Canada
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Alain Magloire [mailto:alain@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 7:38 PM
To: cdt-core-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [cdt-core-dev] Open C++ Parser

>
> Hey all,
>

>
> We're having a lot of fun here porting the Open C++ parser to Java for
> potential use in the CDT.  We've started parsing some basic things like
> stdio.h and performance up until now seems to be reasonable.
>

>
> However, before we get too far, people on the conference call on Monday
> mentioned they had experience with the Open C++ parser and were willing to
> share that with us.  If you were one of those persons, could you please drop
> us a line.  I have made some changes to make the parser do what we want
> including: our own handwritten scanner that also handles pre-processor
> directives, using exceptions for backtracking, replacing the Ptree with our
> own JDT-like AST, amongst other minor changes.  In the end, we're really
> only using the grammar and the strategy of handwriting the parser.  And it
> seems to be working although there is a lot of testing that needs to go
> on...
>

I would propose, if that can make things easier for you, to make a
branch, openc-cpp or something.
This would be a developement branch.  Then we can merge it back or not.

_______________________________________________
cdt-core-dev mailing list
cdt-core-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-core-dev


Back to the top