On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 06:34:53 -0800 (PST), Ingo Menger
<quetzalcotl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On 11 Feb., 13:00, Xah Lee <x...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Mark Tarver <dr.mtar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> «A lot of those [mathematica's list manipulation] functions have been
>> around in CL for years implemented by CL programmers in applications
>> or as part of the language standard.»
>>
>> You speak too quick Mark.
>>
>> From what i know of emacs lisp, and scheme literature (reading the
>> sicp book and r4rs a decade ago), and from the discussions i see from
>> Common Lispers here, CL has nothing like the complete set of
>> Mathematica's list manipulating functions.
>
>Since when is it forbidden to implement some algorithms, assuming
>nobody has a patent on them?
>For this, we don't even have to discuss the utterly absurd notion of a
>patent on algorithms. The only question is, whether the "complete set
>of Mathematica's list manipulating functions in any language of the
>world" is patented or not.
The algorithms may be PD, but Wolfram may have a copyright on the API
which you _might_ be infringing by implementing it elsewhere. "Look
and feel" copyrights are a PITA because you can never predict how a
judge will perceive similarities.
George
--
for email reply remove "/" from address
|
