A system for determining if two operands point to different locations in memory, the system comprising: a compiler for receiving source code and generating executable code from the source code, the source code comprising an expression comprising an operator associated with a first operand and a second operand, the expression evaluating to true when the first operand and the second operand point to different memory locations.
My understanding is that each and every claim stands on it's own.
Now, some claims refer to other claims... so, you can kill multiple claims by killing the underlying claim.
But, claim #1 says absolutely nothing about BASIC.
Also, when I read it, I get the impression that BASIC is mentions for demonstration purposes only, that the claim is for everything like BASIC.
For example, I see this:
[0015] A system, method and computer-readable medium support the use of a single operator that allows a comparison of two variables to determine if the two variables point to different locations in memory, that is, the reverse of the existing "Is" operator in a BASIC programming language or a derivative of BASIC or BASIC-like programming language. In one embodiment of the invention, the memory locations represent objects. The new operator enables a user to determine if the left operand (e.g., a reference type) "is not" the same instance as the reference type listed as the right operand. The use of a single operand for this concept may increase the readability of the programming language.
Which mentions derivitaves of BASIC and BASIC like languages. And, it mentions in one embodiment of the invention, the memory locations represent objects.. (Can you say dot net?)
Here is another part that makes me think it isn't just BASIC:
[0029] FIG. 2 and the following discussion are intended to provide a brief general description of a suitable computing environment in which the invention may be implemented. It should be understood, however, that handheld, portable, and other computing devices of all kinds are contemplated for use in connection with the present invention. While a general purpose computer is described below, this is but one example, and the present invention requires only a thin client having network server interoperability and interaction. Thus, the present invention may be implemented in an environment of networked hosted services in which very little or minimal client resources are implicated, e.g., a networked environment in which the client device serves merely as a browser or interface to the World Wide Web.
Again, the mention of a browser and the web make me think of dot net.
Then, in paragraph [0041] we see this sentence:
One such design environment may be MICROSOFT VISUAL BASIC.NET, BORLAND DELPHI or the like.
Which tags two non-BASIC languages (.net and delphi/pascal)
I think that if you read it closely you start getting the impression that they are trying to patent an idea that is expressed in many programming languages.
The effects of being a rallying banner for terrorism are limited.
I'm not so sure about that. GW has been incredibly successful at rallying the terrorist.
Remember, he is a uniter. Since, this is the only group that has actually been "united" under his leadership... that must have been what he meant.
Seriously, you walk into a bar at midnight and proclaim that you are going to beat the shit of the baddest mofo in the house... you think everyone is going to back down?
Barely half of Americans even vote. (Last presidential election was less than 52% of eligible voters.)
Think about that... we call ourselves a democracy (we aren't but most A's are to stupid to know that) and yet we've NEVER had a president that had anywhere close to half the population think that they were good enough that they would get off their ass and go vote for the guy.
And, as far as the "loud anti-Bush crap like yours" goes... fuck off. Somebody had to be put on the bottom of the damn case statement.
This was a coding example of how to write sneaky code. (Around here we call that a "topic".) Look at the responses... many people missed the breaks.
That was the point of the post.
If I want to make fun of Bush, I'll do it straight up.
So... if you want to talk about how "half" of the population voted for the dumb ass... remember, half of the population is also "below average".
Looks like people sticking together to me.
(See... now that's a swipe at Bush... and his supporters.)
Know how to tell Bush has not been anywhere without the secret service? Easy, he is still alive. That doesn't sound like support to me... he is so fucking scared that an American is going to kill his ass that he won't even let anyone that doesn't swear allegance anywhere near. Not even rallys.
One look at my sig should have been a clue that I don't give a rat's ass about either party.
But... (hold on, here comes another one) as a Bush supporter you are obviously incapable of buying a fucking clue.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess it depends on what you call "available technologies".
If you look at web hosting, you almost always see MySQL as "available" while PostgresSQL is a bit more rare.
That is, IMHO, why PHP is so popular... and the same goes for MySQL.
They are ubiquitous.
I'm not so sure of that.
Take a look at this post that I made above.
Now, some claims refer to other claims... so, you can kill multiple claims by killing the underlying claim.
But, claim #1 says absolutely nothing about BASIC.
Also, when I read it, I get the impression that BASIC is mentions for demonstration purposes only, that the claim is for everything like BASIC.
For example, I see this:Which mentions derivitaves of BASIC and BASIC like languages. And, it mentions in one embodiment of the invention, the memory locations represent objects.. (Can you say dot net?)
Here is another part that makes me think it isn't just BASIC:Again, the mention of a browser and the web make me think of dot net.
Then, in paragraph [0041] we see this sentence:Which tags two non-BASIC languages (.net and delphi/pascal)
I think that if you read it closely you start getting the impression that they are trying to patent an idea that is expressed in many programming languages.
Not just an implementation in one language.
If they actually get around to doing another election, how will they collect votes this time?
There are few times that you get a "second chance". Wonder if they'll make the same mistake twice...
What is really bad, is that he was the most honest person in the place.
Course with Bush and Cheney in the room that ain't hard.
Those people, whatever the number will not have died in vain if the US accomplishes its goal of a free, stable Iraqi society.
Why does the US get to decide?
that would gladly gouge an american's eyes out with a rusty spoon?
Republican or Democrat?
Wow.
That is like being proud of beating a child.
I mean, being so overwhelmingly powerful... and then just beating the shit out of a 6 day old baby has got to really get the old testosteron flowing.
I don't see how this was any different.
He didn't get it from the 'air-farce', he was in the National Guard. Besides, you can't teach someone that isn't there.
Isn't it also, by definition, one sided?
If so, I would consider that to be 'bad'.
Facts don't need spinning.
Why should someone waste their time responding to an AC?
And, why should anyone respond to the bllushit "got a link for that" response? Seriously, heard of Google? Go use it and respond with facts.
I don't mind the "hive mind" stuff nearly as much as the "AC comeback" that questions everything that was said and yet provides no real info either.
And, this goes both ways for both sides.
Kudos to you for actually posting non-AC. (Unfortunately, I think you are about to get modded into oblivion for it.)
Well you don't think a fucking moron like Bush can actually run a country do you?
As of this last election, he can run about 51% of the country. (That is apparently how many morons we have.)
If they could think...
My rule has always been:
If you don't have time to fix it if things go wrong, don't do it.
I make sure all my techs follow this rule.
That would be the perfect kind of system for those already in charge.
No matter their affiliation.
The effects of being a rallying banner for terrorism are limited.
I'm not so sure about that. GW has been incredibly successful at rallying the terrorist.
Remember, he is a uniter. Since, this is the only group that has actually been "united" under his leadership... that must have been what he meant.
Seriously, you walk into a bar at midnight and proclaim that you are going to beat the shit of the baddest mofo in the house... you think everyone is going to back down?
You'll be lucky to survive the ordeal.
How?
You keep repeating the same thing over (like a republican) but you never explain it.
And, don't try to equate betrayal of a person with being a traitor to your country.
They are totally different.
Perhaps you should read them next time.
And what part of my post indicates that I did not, Sherlock?
I hate replying to sigs... since changing them changes them for old comments also...
But... nice sig.
Made me get off my ass and check it out for myself.
Half of America does not want Bush.
Barely half of Americans even vote. (Last presidential election was less than 52% of eligible voters.)
Think about that... we call ourselves a democracy (we aren't but most A's are to stupid to know that) and yet we've NEVER had a president that had anywhere close to half the population think that they were good enough that they would get off their ass and go vote for the guy.
And, as far as the "loud anti-Bush crap like yours" goes... fuck off. Somebody had to be put on the bottom of the damn case statement.
This was a coding example of how to write sneaky code. (Around here we call that a "topic".) Look at the responses... many people missed the breaks.
That was the point of the post.
If I want to make fun of Bush, I'll do it straight up.
So... if you want to talk about how "half" of the population voted for the dumb ass... remember, half of the population is also "below average".
Looks like people sticking together to me.
(See... now that's a swipe at Bush... and his supporters.)
Know how to tell Bush has not been anywhere without the secret service? Easy, he is still alive. That doesn't sound like support to me... he is so fucking scared that an American is going to kill his ass that he won't even let anyone that doesn't swear allegance anywhere near. Not even rallys.
One look at my sig should have been a clue that I don't give a rat's ass about either party.
But... (hold on, here comes another one) as a Bush supporter you are obviously incapable of buying a fucking clue.
P.S. Consider this discussion closed. Asshole.
And, I'm sure Bush would believe he really does have that much more "support" from "his" citizens than Kerry.
You are one of those guys that only has sex to procreate, aren't you?
Hey... I know... how about this:
The bill of rights is about *citizens* and *their* rights.
And... so that *citizens* can remain in a free state... they can bear arms... to protect *themselves*
The word "state" isn't meant to imply some political body... it is meant to imply a political "state of being"... as in... free.
Actually, everyone else flies.
And, they use loyalty cards... and credit cards.
You stand out like a sore thumb, because you *don't* do these things... almost like you don't want to be noticed.
So, what are you trying to hide?
Comrade.
See?
I told you he could not be trusted!
satan@hell.gov
Only if that is what you have run level 6 configured to do.
All the init 6 command does is initialize run level 6. You can have run level 6 configured any way you want.
It isn't hard wired to shut down. (On debian run level 6 does a reboot... run level 0 halts the system.)