Replacement for GMP: Update
p.tanski at gmail.com
Thu Aug 10 12:47:19 EDT 2006
>> * "This product includes software developed by the OpenSSL Project
>> * for use in the OpenSSL Toolkit (http://www.openssl.org/)".
>> All developers would have to do is include the acknowledgment stated
> I think this is not bad for specific applications, but forcing this
> upon all code compiled by GHC would be bad. I think the compiler
> should not link applications by default to things that force
> license related things.
> I think this is one reason GMP is being replaced.
> ps. personally I don't think the advertising clause is bad, but
> I think it is bad to force it on other users.
You may be right. The licensing problem with GHC, as I understood
it, is summed up at <http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/
ReplacingGMPNotes>. LGPL is very restrictive.
As I have been working on separating BN out of the main OpenSSL
distribution, renaming symbols and generally reforming it into a
custom, stand-alone library for GHC I could take it one step further
and implement it from scratch as a GHC library. Implementing the BN
library from scratch may take some time but I will give it a shot and
see if I can't get better benchmarks. The downside is that I would
have more incentive to remove some Cryptography-based cruft, such as
BN_nnmod, BN_mod_add, BN_mod_sub and the BN-random routines, as these
are unnecessary for Prelude and GHC.
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users