Re: [PATCH gcc/* 1/2] gcc: copy expected and optional out of rust/utils

Florian Weimer <[email protected]> writes:

> Is CC0 acceptable for GCC?  It's not an allowed license for software in
> Fedora.

FTR: These files are already in GCC (under gcc/rust/util), I'm merely
moving them around.

> |  CC0-1.0, which has a clause that says that it does not license or
> |  otherwise "affect" patent rights, is no longer allowed, but it
> |  continues to be allowed-content.
>
> <https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/license-approval/>

Hmm, maybe we should ask the author (Sy Brand) about patent guarantees,
then.

Arthur, do you have any more details?

Worst-case, as an alternative, I reckon it's possible to reuse the
libstdc++ implementation of <optional> and <expected> (I expect that
this change would have very little, or no, impact, as Sy's
implementation is compatible with the standard one, though they did opt
to provide a few extensions that we may or may not be using).

We'd need to work out the details wrt. how to best reuse libstdc++ code
in gcc/, but that shouldn't be too hard.

(FWIW I suggested doing so when these implementations of optional and
 expected were initially added, but I do not recall why we chose not to
 go that route back then)
-- 
Arsen Arsenović

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEKBAEWCgCyFiEE/uKz0RP8AKMWLWBhUsKUMB6ixJMFAmqEI7AbFIAAAAAABAAO
bWFudTIsMi41KzEuMTIsMiwyXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25z
Lm9wZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRGRUUyQjNEMTEzRkMwMEEzMTYyRDYw
NjE1MkMyOTQzMDFFQTJDNDkzGBxhYXJzZW5vdmljQGJheWxpYnJlLmNvbQAKCRBS
wpQwHqLEk7ADAQCOOFAR+pzxd8A6GvWoJ/dKVz8KUusNLDgZaAGWPQAgFgD/YTVY
HVg5/TToIqBbKExus4phw4sv9Gno0B0y/KcXwwQ=
=jcN1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----