decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
'520 patent. WTH? | 225 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
'520 patent. WTH?
Authored by: Gringo_ on Thursday, May 10 2012 @ 10:10 PM EDT

Most C compilers do their static initialization at compile time - Only an idiot would create a process to fix the problem after it had occurred.

But that makes an executable bloated. Seems kind of dumb to store a bunch of zeros - maybe thousands of them, in the exe. You would think the launcher could be only slightly more intelligent to take a count of bytes and supply the zeros at launch time, wouldn't you? However, I do agree with you they don't deserve a patent for the Java method. It is just a logical alternative.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

So....
Authored by: Guil Rarey on Thursday, May 10 2012 @ 10:39 PM EDT
Does that make Ellison the heir to throne of the kingdom of idiots?

Ambassador Mollari, is that you?

---
If the only way you can value something is with money, you have no idea what
it's worth. If you try to make money by making money, you won't. You might con
so

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

a[b] = c equals b[a] = c (?)
Authored by: BJ on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 10:34 AM EDT
Haven't read the 520 patent, but if it's about a[b] = c statements,
possibly Google could get around that with some equivalent
b[a] = c statements. LOL.

This hinges on Java arrays having (or the Java parser honoring)
the commutative property. Like in C myarray[3] equals 3[myarray];
when I read this in Dr. Dobbs many many years ago, I was
funnily dumbstruck.

bjd



[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )