Re: Function References

squishywaffle@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

How much more liberal can it get than MIT-licensed?

Again, the licensing issue is everything to do with the original
library distributor, NOT ctypes.

I read library distributor as "ctypes-library distributor" because it is
3rd-party under 2.4. Which was the reason I quotet it's MIT-license.

And it escapes me what accessing the lib from ctypes is any different than
from your own compiled code.

But then, if you insist, go down the hard road.

Irrelevant and unnecessary. If you don't want to help, don't please
don't reply.

I take the freedom to do so as I see fit - this is usenet...

Diez
.