🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991Mar31.192347.4953@netcom.COM> rkitts@netcom.COM (Rick Kitts) writes:
/The point of this then is that I am not
/suprised that their are apparently no non-Stepstone implementations of
/Objective-C. 
/I would be curious to
/know if anyone has elected not to do an Objective-C because of these
/licensing arrangements.

I did. Back some years ago, I investigated whether to do C++ or Objective-C
as an extension to the Datalight (now Zortech) C compiler. I picked
C++ primarilly because it was an open language, and I would not get sued
for implementing it and calling it C++. At that time, it was a matter of
great debate which one was going to succeed. I strongly feel that AT&T
made the right (!) choice in making it open, and that was the single biggest
factor in the subsequent success of C++.

I suspect that if the Eiffel and Actor people had sold the *source*
to their compiler rather than the binaries, their languages would be much
more successful...