News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Defending GCC considered futile. Parent comment

Re:Defending GCC considered futile by DannyBee on Tuesday February 10, 2015 @11:14AM (#9028046)
"Apple and Google do not contribute code freely, nor do they contribute a significant amount of their code. The contributions are limited to areas in which an advantage exists."

This is simply false, actually. But of course, you have no evidence of this, only rhetoric, while i actually see literally every code contribution google makes.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending GCC considered futile by throwaway90999 on Tuesday February 10, 2015 @12:19PM (#9028484)
By all means contradict me. Do they open source more than 25% of their code written?

More than 10%?

More than 1%?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending GCC considered futile by Anderkent on Tuesday February 10, 2015 @12:36PM (#9028587)
That's not what you claimed. You claimed they do not contribute code freely; they certainly do. It might not be a very significant percentage if their code written, but it's a fact that they contribute code to open source projects, and they do not charge for it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending GCC considered futile by throwaway90999 on Tuesday February 10, 2015 @01:00PM (#9028723)
I see the misunderstanding. When I say "contribute code freely" I mean "without restriction."

You are certainly aware that the vast majority of code is under strict restrictions and will be leveraged for competitive/controlling purposes rather than being shared. Employees wishing to freely contribute code in these domains will have their requests denied.

We've both been employed by large SV companies; we both know how this works. The majority of software will be used in an attempt to control the market.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending GCC considered futile by DannyBee on Tuesday February 10, 2015 @03:40PM (#9029753)
"You are certainly aware that the vast majority of code is under strict restrictions and will be leveraged for competitive/controlling purposes rather than being shared. Employees wishing to freely contribute code in these domains will have their requests denied. "

?????? None of this is true. I mean, literally none of this. I don't even know where to begin.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending GCC considered futile by throwaway90999 on Tuesday February 10, 2015 @04:11PM (#9029922)
This isn't a complicated statement. Why are you struggling with it?

Google does not open source the VAST majority of their code -- it remains tightly restricted. Surely agree this is an accurate statement?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending GCC considered futile by DannyBee on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @01:24PM (#9034515)
Because it's an incredibly vague statement that is open to many interpretations?

As written, actually, i don't agree with it.

Google has open sourced > 100 million lines of source code, depending on how you count.

I can't tell you what percent this is, but it is quite significant

It is the vast majority of a number of products, and not the vast majority of a number of other products.

In fact, for some subsidiaries, all of the code is open source. For some, it isn't.

So your statement depends on a lot - who are you counting, what is "their code" (Code we've written, code we've modified, or code we use), etc

If you make a detailed enough statement, i'd probably agree. But as written, there are plenty of cases where google open sources the vast majority of it's code.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending GCC considered futile by throwaway90999 on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @11:57PM (#9037468)
If you insist on continuing to be disingenuous we can simply end the conversation.
[ Parent | on HN ]