[plt-dev] Re: [PRL] Programming Languages in the Code of Federal Regulations

This text is gibberish. How do you get an answer if you don't
interpret your program? Why is x86 not a programming language?

Robby

On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 8:22 AM, Bryan Chadwick <chadwick at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
> It seems they only have one (explicit) requirement: "interpreted", but
> even that isn't really a requirement.  Any (platform independent)
> programming language should do, so long as securities issuers present
> their source... not bytecode.
>
> A more pressing concern should be standardization.
>
> Bryan.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Pg. 214 of the proposal:
>  http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2010/33-9117.pdf
>
>  "Python is an open source interpreted programming
>   language. Open source means that the source code is available
>   to all users (as opposed to proprietary source code that can
>   be viewed only by the owner or developer of the program). An
>   interpreted language is a programming language that requires
>   an interpreter in the target computer for program
>   execution.
>
>   We prohibit the inclusion of executable code in electronic
>   submissions on EDGAR because of the computer security risks
>   posed by accepting executable code for filing. Executable code
>   results from separately compiling a computer program prior to
>   running it. Since Python is an interpreted language that does
>   not need to be compiled prior to running it, executable code
>   would not need to be published on EDGAR, and we would not
>   require EDGAR to establish facilities to host, run, or operate
>   any computer program."
>
>
>> Relevant background question: does anyone know how they picked
>> Python? This information would probably tell us a lot about what
>> it is that they're looking for.
>
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev
>