|
|
|
| Authored by: clemenstimpler on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 08:49 PM EDT |
| The SSO in the libraries cannot be patented.
You probably wanted to
write 'copyrighted'. ;)
Besides that, I agree that it is important to keep in
mind that copyrighted works must exist in a 'fixed and tangible medium'. None of
the media an API may exist in has been copied by Google. Some more thoughts on
that in an earlier comment. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, April 22 2012 @ 11:53 AM EDT |
In my past programming experiences of using various vendor
versions of C, I have found that not all of the library
functions calls are located in the same libraries. The
function calls would be the same, but the particular
library that the functions would be in would differ. To
deal with this, I would have to make sure that I included
the proper header and linked in the correct library.
However, the source code calls to the library functions
never had to be changed changed or modified.
I do not program using Java so I cannot say if two different
implementations of Java could have different SSO's and
still work.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
