4 ms·
Well, here's claim 1: In a computer system, a method for increasing the execution speed of virtual machine instructions, the method comprising: - inputting vi
by shasta 16y ago
Well, here's claim 1:
In a computer system, a method for increasing the execution speed of virtual machine instructions, the method comprising:
- inputting virtual machine instructions for a function;
- compiling a portion of the function into at least one native machine instruction so that the function includes both virtual and native machine instruction; and
- overwriting a selected virtual machine instruction of the function with a new virtual machine instruction, the new virtual machine instruction specifying execution of at least one native machine instruction.
You think that sounds like an idea worthy of a patent? Probably depends if you're a programmer or a patent lawyer.
I'll leave you to judge the merits of the other 46 claims, the next of which are:
2. Claim 1 in a box
3. Claim 1 with a fox
- btilly 16y agoIt sounds like the sort of stuff that Smalltalk implementations were doing before Java existed. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-in-time_compilation#History http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-in-time_compilation#Histor... for more. (I wonder whether Sun's patents were filed for Self?)
- fhars 16y agoSun bought several of these, especially the developers of Strongtalk, a compiled, statically typed dialect of Smalltalk. So if there is any prior art on this, chances are that all the related patents are now in Oracle's portfolio.
- gaius 16y agosigh A patent isn't an idea. It's the specific method for implementing an idea. If there is a way to get the same end result using a completely different method, the patent doesn't apply.
- btilly 16y agoHow does that relate to my comment that the patent in question sounds like it could have come out of Sun's work on optimizing Smalltalk instead of their later Java implementation? (Note that even if Sun could have worked around their own patents, they would have had no reason to bother.)
- koenigdavidmj 16y agoYes! And the first few claims generally paint way over the lines. It's in the later claims that you talk about the unique stuff that you did.
- kj12345 16y agoA "method" which is not being acted out physically, but instead is in someone's head or written down on paper is a type of idea. So some ideas are patentable, others aren't. The mantra that ideas aren't patentable presumes some other category of thought completely apart from ideas. Besides, what could be more purely and precisely methodical than machine-readable source code, in this case Smalltalk source code?
- Confusion 16y agoAgain, as tptacek already said: careful. The summary isn't the actual claim either. The devil is in the details.
- shasta 16y agoThe above is the actual first claim from the patent. Of course it's subject to interpretation in context, but that is the text of the first claim.