Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 14:21:01 -0700 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> Cc: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net>, FreeBSD-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Microsoft has a patent on [] (fwd) Message-ID: <199810072121.OAA02625@dingo.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 07 Oct 1998 15:02:49 MDT." <4.1.19981007150153.0403d560@mail.lariat.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> At 01:59 PM 10/7/98 -0700, Mike Smith wrote: > > >> > Interpreters are specifically excluded (they don't produce object > >> > code). It's arguable whether a JIT bytecoder intrudes on enough of > >> > this to be covered. > > > >"bytecode" is a generic term for just that, as is P-code, etc. Most > >popular interpreters these days (Perl, Tcl, Java, etc.) are either JIT- > >or pre-bytecoders. As I said, it's arguable as to whether this is > >covered or not. > > Microsoft's only product that does this is VB, which is what the patent > was intended to cover. That much is clear. Was I giving them too much credit in assuming that VB actually produces machine instructions? The short-form implies that machine-executed instructions are generated, while the longer statement of claim is very careful to avoid any such mention. Incidentally, the patent claims (#6 and #7 in particular) cover both early and late binding. Still. Software patents suck, period. I'm happy to agree there. 8) -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199810072121.OAA02625>