|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 13 2012 @ 06:04 PM EDT |
I don't think it gets you very far to conflate two entirely different semantics
by treating ever so slightly varying grammar and context as insignificant.
"A Java bytecode" refers to a single instruction within a bytecode
file or within memory. No other data that this single instruction references
can be part of this thing called "a Java bytecode", regardless of
where it resides, if it is not contained within this single instruction.
In contrast, "Java bytecode" can refer to one or more multiples of
"a Java bytecode", or it can refer to the whole file which normally
contains bytecodes and other data, or if you use the term very generically , it
can refer to entire concepts related to Java implementation.
You have to use context to distinguish between these meanings. When the
discussion is very specifically about the operation of data referencing by a
given bytecode instruction, as in the case of that patent, then you're not
really free to bring in the broader meanings of these words that would apply in
different contexts.
English has a limited supply of words, and we reuse them very often to convey
varying semantics. In this case though, it's very clear that the context is a
single bytecode instruction, because the patent refers to that repeatedly.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
