<je********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@k79g2000hse.googlegr oups.com...
As I said, I am trying to generate interest in this SDK which I am
announcing and offering to the world :)
that is one way to term it...
sorry if I am a bit confrontational here, I am saying things as I see them.
hell, you did give a response, at least giving some points...
As you can see on the first page, the SDK is available free for
download.
well, you say it is free, but do you say it is not commercial?...
well, as can be noted, I have not much investigated the site, but it does
look commercial.
some of us like that are compilers are open source, and that our standards
are open and more or less communally accepted. to some extent, it is a
standard of agreement, rather than of dictation.
to some people, "come and use my free-although-commerial non-standard
technologies" is not necessarily all that well taken.
for example, would you regard it as a good or a bad thing if someone else
completely cloned your whole effort, and gained popularity and success at
it?...
for some of us, that would be a good thing, after all, it is good ideas that
are reused.
other people would feel annoyed and ripped off, because it was someone else,
and not themselves...
If you actually spend a bit of time learning about it, I will be happy
to discuss it more with you :)
or you can tell, for example, is it actually C?...
the examples make me think, it is not.
some of the variations you mention, similarly point out its non-C-ness...
(though, admittedly, it is a different language...).
so, compiler extensions vs language differences.
this group, at least in a general sense (not going into specifics, like
whether or not said API feature is standard, and so on...), is still about C
proper, and not "vaguely C-ish languages".
note that to a large degree, this group is also a gathering place of newbs,
where it is IMO better to start off newbs with standard technologies and
practices, and let them mess with more divergent possibilities as they see
fit...
for example, comp.lang.misc could be a better place, for all it matters (if
only, sadly, there were more people on comp.lang.misc...).
comp.object may also be a worthwhile place, and others...
now, one could argue, I am "a pot calling a kettle black", maybe...
after all, I have my own funky non-standard (and largely, barely working and
crap) framework, oh well.
of course, to what extent I operate, it is realization of certain goals
(say, a partial destruction of the compile/link/run cycle distinction,
allowing C to be loaded like scripts, or, in part, using C like python,
lisp, or smalltalk...), it does not matter as much to me if I realize these
goals, or someone else (say, for example, the LLVM community, which may well
have a better footing at least, or at least a far more developed project).
as a result, talking about technologies matters more important, and flogging
it off is slightly less important (well, assuming all my stuff were actually
all that usable). just, one has to talk about specific technologies and
efforts often to describe more general technologies...
so, one can ask, what is the goal?...