Haxe runtime licensing

The Haxe licensing page seems to offer very limited detail on runtime entitlements. Does anyone know is there is additional detail posted somewhere else? I was hoping for the level of detail found in something like the GCC Runtime Exception licensing, where it includes very specific definitions and a more legal explanation as to entitlements.


I am trying to understand, very specifically what is required for distributing and using the output of the Haxe Compiler. The text of most concern is this:

If you use Haxe and the Haxe compiler it is not required that you release your work under a free open source software license.

There is no definition of what “your work” is. As an example, does your work refer to my source code or my Haxe Compiler output runtime code? I realize this may seem obvious, but in order to fully ensure I/we understand the legal side of this, more details are needed.

That’s a fair question (the wording isn’t great), but no worries.

The phrase that worry you is about the Haxe compiler toolchain itself VS the rest:

  • the toolchain code itself is GPLv2,
  • the GCC exemption you point to corresponds to what is defined as “Haxe standard library”, which is MIT licensed.

The only “Haxe runtime” is NekoVM (MIT), which is typically used for CLI apps using the neko target; other target platforms don’t have a runtime, but Haxe code is “transpiled” to the target platform’s code (e.g. JS code for browser, php, python, C#, C++, SWF bytecode…), and completed by the “standard library” (MIT).

The only “Haxe runtime” is NekoVM (MIT)

Well, to be fair, hxcpp is Haxe’s CPP “runtime”, its license is here looks like MIT to me: hxcpp/LICENSE.txt at master · HaxeFoundation/hxcpp · GitHub

And Hashlink, which the website states is MIT licensed.

But as you say, other language targets (SWF, JS, Python, PHP, etc) have their own runtimes.

Good point, Jeff.
hxcpp isn’t part of the compiler so as with each library you have to check the license.