Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft's 'IsNot' Patent Continued...

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the but-don't-worry-it's-only-for-basic dept.

An anonymous reader writes " According to the patent application--filed in mid-November by Paul Vick, lead architect for Visual Basic .Net at Microsoft; Amanda Silver, a program manager on the Visual Basic team; and an individual in Bellevue, Wash., named Costica Barsan--the IsNot operator is described as a single operator that allows a comparison of two variables to determine if the two point to the same location in memory." This article continues the tale started last november, and here is an eWeek story on the same subject.

5 of 566 comments (clear)

  1. Changing code again by phikapjames · · Score: -1, Redundant

    I'm guessing I can't finish my school project anymore. It involves two memory location comparisons. if(*ptr1 != *ptr2) { PayMicrosoftPatentFees(MoneyAmount); } I could be wrong, but isn't that what they want to patent?

    1. Re:Changing code again by n0dalus · · Score: -1, Redundant

      not having RTFA, I think that what they are trying to patent is something like:
      if ( val1 isNot val2 ) {...
      to be interpreted as:
      if ( *val1 != *val2 ) {...

      I really don't see how this is a problem, since I doubt people are really stupid enough to type a whole extra character. It's just the Microsoft way (TM) of making things more complex.

      All the books, all the online guides, all existing source code and all the lecturers will still teach pointers the good ol' fashion way.

      If Microsoft wants to waste money on something that nobody will ever want, use or need, that's fine with me, as long as they then don't go on to say "Hey, you stole our isNot code and made it better, then made it available to the general public without giving us money, expect a C&D notice from our lawyers."

  2. Re:Oh please! by Shambhu · · Score: -1, Redundant

    You've found the solution to this whole mess! Quick! Somebody file a patent on the business process of filing bad patent applications. Then they can sue anyone else who tries it.

    No "Step 3: ???" here, baby. It's pure PROFIT!!

    --
    Rome wasn't bilked in a day.
  3. Luckily... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant

    ... I got them beat with my 'IsToo' patent!

  4. Re:Oh please! by eraserewind · · Score: 0, Redundant

    3) Sue lots of small companies who won't bother contesting it very much so as to build up your warchest to "ensure you can pay at least as much for your lawyers as the big company you sued."
    4) Profit