No part of the C AI Interface is AWK generated (but as Kloot and Tobi explained, it would not matter anyway). The new C++ AI Wrapper is mostly AWK generated, but as Tobi explained, this does not matter. This is made clear by the fact that all the generated source files also contain the GPL header.
The GPL is not limited to C/C++, and if linking
in the GPL world had the same meaning as linking
in the C/C++ world, GPL would be useless for most other languages.
As i see the current state in the discussion reagarding AF & Shard & AI+GPL:
- from now on, it is made clear, and everyone accepted that there is no exception from the GPL for AIs
- AI devs have to options: release source & binary or release nothing (regardless of possible inconveniences that this may cause them)
If your professor wants you to prove it works, and you need the community for this, but you are not allowed to release the source to this community in return for the testing, AI configurations, the engine + AI Interface, games, maps and active support, then explain it to him in these words and ask him wtf he thinks makes him being above everything, and pushing you to do something illegal.
i still would like to hear the argument they would bring up there (not that there could be a viable one, as it would always be illegal).
It is also very fishy of a universities policy to require keeping source closed, and thus being drastically anti Open Source, while running Linux on their servers, teaching Java with Eclipse and what not.
It would be nice for them to explain this here. of course they are way to busy for that, cause they are so important.
.. would they ever have discovered if you released the source from the beginning? i guess they do not read the spring forum.
Argh & only Lua AIs
you brought this up already, with the exact same arguments, and nothing has changed since. Basically, aegis gave a sufficient answer, although he was quite... simplistic, and you did not get it, so i give the full answer
You want AI to be entertaining for noobs, or give a relatively acceptable game. You think, that is what all players of the games want too, which is already wrong. In addition to that, the players are not our only clients, but AI devs are too. I (and others) do care for them, and we spend our time to serve them. You think this is stupid, and our time would be better spent doing other stuff. Luckily, you are not to decide for us, and i am pretty sure you will not be able to convince us of your way of seeing the issue. Please stop bringing up this issue without anything having changed drastically.
Better run-time performance never was a main reason for having other languages for AIs.