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
the play by play | 400 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Parent is correct
Authored by: celtic_hackr on Monday, May 14 2012 @ 02:25 AM EDT

"Teach yourself ... Delphi 2", Devra Hall, 1996, MIS-Press, p59:
"This might be a good time to note the difference between design-time and run-time properties. In the first two chapters, you used the Object Inspector to assign values to the various components' properties. All the design-time properties for each component are listed in the Object Inspector. Run-time properties are those properties whose values can be set and/or reset while your application is running."

Italics in the original. There's more. I have other references, to run-time and also dynamic code changes. But those books are behind a shelf in my child's room, and said child is asleep now.

It's totally not accurate, and a bold faced lie to boot, to construe "running" as "run-time". Run-time has a very specific meaning in the world of programming, and if Mr. Mitchell is putting forth a proposal that what the Dalvik VM is doing is run-time dynamic changes, he's either unqualified as an expert or perjuring through his teeth.

Compilation (or in this case cross-compilation) is a static, non-run-time activity. Dynamic activity can *only* happen in the actual running program.

Take for example your standard Windows program. It makes calls to the Windows OS, which is composed of a core program and DLLs (Dynamic Link Library). More or less, I'm simplifying "core program", for brevity. The linking of those DLLs and the variable resolutions and substitutions happens dynamically at run-time of the client application.

The variables and substitutions in the client program itself may be either static or dynamic.

I'll find some other references tomorrow, but rest assured "running" is not conclusively equal to "run-time". A device that is running will have a number of applications which are in the "run-time" state. But an application being cross-compiled/optimized is not one of them.

The cross-compiler/optimizer is in run-time. But the application is just so much data to be crunched by it. The application is not "running", in "run-time" or being "simulatedly executed". It's being compiled or optimized.

It's like saying you are making a "50(b) motion" when actually asking for "403 objection". Or saying you were driving a car while the engine was running and you were sitting in the back seat while parked.

I don't see how any of these lawyers can feign ignorance of this. Mitchell certainly knows better. Yes, I'm barking mad about this.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

the play by play
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 14 2012 @ 11:42 PM EDT
Here's the actual view of Mcfadden:

"
Mr. McFadden: Dexopt often runs at install time.

Google: Does it ever run at runtime?

Mr. McFadden: No.
"

So he clearly know the difference between install-time and run-time, and states
it correctly.

But on cross, Oracle confuses the issue here...:
"
Oracle: "Faster execution once linkage is known", so dexopt
instruction rewriting allows for faster execution?

Mr. McFadden: It can.

Oracle: This sentence is true?

Mr. McFadden: Yes.
"

Now McFadden is talking about something that hasn't happened, the 'faster
execution' is in the run-time of the optimized output. Dextopt is in
install-time.

But Oracle goes ahead and builds on that as if its faster execution in the
install-time. Then they switch terms:
"
Oracle: Linkage can only be known on a running system.

Mr. McFadden: If you mean it's plugged in and turned on, I agree.

Oracle: I mean "running system" as expressed in this sentence.

Mr. McFadden: If it's plugged in and turned on, then it's a running system, so
yes.
"

He even says what he means by running system...'plugged in and turned on' which
is so broad as to include a completely new system with no OS at all happily
beeping error codes.

But Oracle gets him to say yes to 'running' where all along they've been talking
about run-time. He knows the difference, but will the jury?

[ 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 )