license issues (was mystery exception)

[Geoff Canyon]

Any method that required positive enforcement (allowing stacks to do 
something to disable the script length limits) would be far more 
vulnerable than the current setup where the engine is inherently 
limited without the license key.

I'm currently doing a great deal of experimentation with do and value 
(in support of my research into Lisp), and I'm not finding the script 
length limits to be an obstacle at all.

On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 01:08 AM, Robert Brenstein wrote:

> All true but how easy is it to use the engine of a standalone to 
> couple it with full development GUI to produce new products? Is 
> message box really fully functional in standalones? If so, I rather 
> have no message box than do limit. I also think that while 
> distributing an unlocked engine could lead to problems you describe, 
> it should be possible to couple the engine to a specific standalone, 
> for example by requiring the stacks in the standalone to pass the 
> license key with certain calls. Such an approach would allow us to 
> realize the unfullfilled promise of being able to distribute any! 
> MC/Rev-based standalone without it being crippled by this restriction.
>

regards,

Geoff Canyon
gcanyon at inspiredlogic.com