Re: justify use of flex vs. lex - summary (Vern Paxson)
Thu, 4 Feb 1993 03:44:22 GMT

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
justify use of flex vs. lex - summary (1993-02-01)
Re: justify use of flex vs. lex - summary (1993-02-04)
| List of all articles for this month |

Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: (Vern Paxson)
Keywords: lex, comment
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley CA
References: 93-02-022
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1993 03:44:22 GMT (Steve Layten x3451) writes:
> one person ... suggested that I look at PCCTS:
> ... you can use it for commercial products without violating its notice,
> which explicitly permit use for commerical or proprietary software (both
> prohibited by bison&flex's copyright).

Just to keep the record straight (as this point often gets confused),
while bison is covered by the GPL, flex is not; it's covered by the BSD
copyright, which freely permits use in commerical and proprietary software
(so does the GPL, actually, as long as source code is made available).
Furthermore, scanners *generated* by flex are not covered by any sort of
copyright (again, unlike bison-generated parsers). You can do whatever
you like with them. So Basile's final point above is incorrect.


Vern Paxson
Systems Engineering ucbvax!!vern
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (510) 486-7504
[For yacc users for whom the GPL is a problem, Berkeley yacc is in the
public domain, meaning you can do anything with it you want. -John]

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.