meta user
network profile
| bio | website | fogcreek.com |
|---|---|---|
| location | New York, NY | |
| age | 36 | |
| visits | member for | 8 months |
| seen | Dec 26 '12 at 18:05 | |
| stats | profile views | 80 |
CFO Fog Creek Software Inc. CFO Stackoverflow.com LLC
|
Oct 25 |
awarded | Notable Question |
|
Oct 24 |
awarded | Nice Question |
|
Oct 24 |
comment |
Prior art for a web-based system for commissioning software development I think a bug tracker like bugzilla wouldn't have enough overlap to be considered prior art. Mainly it doesn't have the part where you download the different versions that address the specific request you made. |
|
Oct 24 |
comment |
Prior art for a web-based system for commissioning software development Need dates and references in order for it to be remotely useful. |
|
Oct 24 |
comment |
Prior art for a web-based system for commissioning software development Unfortunately, the answer "I have prior art and it's me" isn't sufficient to show prior art. We'd need links to references that show your answer is sufficient (that's why someone downvoted you) |
|
Oct 24 |
awarded | Popular Question |
|
Oct 24 |
comment |
Prior art for a web-based system for commissioning software development Can you add anything in print that says this with a date? |
|
Oct 24 |
awarded | Promoter |
|
Oct 24 |
accepted | Prior art for linked list (secondary and tertiary traversal)? |
|
Oct 18 |
awarded | Good Question |
|
Oct 17 |
awarded | Popular Question |
|
Oct 17 |
awarded | Nice Question |
|
Oct 17 |
asked | Prior art for linked list (secondary and tertiary traversal)? |
|
Sep 27 |
awarded | Commentator |
|
Sep 27 |
comment |
Auto correcting semantic code errors by executing code snippets and seeing which ones produce no errors That's part of the patent, but the entire patent describes that system PLUS the act of executing the code (i.e. not just looking up ) to see if it works, and then using that as the correct substitution. The execution is the key component. |
|
Sep 26 |
comment |
Auto correcting semantic code errors by executing code snippets and seeing which ones produce no errors The key here is that they are not executing the code under the circumstance when an error in the code happens. This is not a try/catch thing. They are, in an IDE, a development environment, trying to fix semantic errors in the way the user has typed code, by running alternate code fragments and seeing if they succeed. It's not related to what you are describing. |
|
Sep 26 |
comment |
Auto correcting semantic code errors by executing code snippets and seeing which ones produce no errors I think this isn't prior art either. The patent isn't for a classic case of error handling, it is for CORRECTING semantic errors by trying other little snippets, and executing them to see if the program compiles correctly and runs correctly. Its not related to CFTRY or CFCATCH blocks at all, but I very much appreciate the time you spent answering. |
|
Sep 26 |
comment |
Auto correcting semantic code errors by executing code snippets and seeing which ones produce no errors The non-obvious part would be this section: "executing, by a computer, the primary executable code snippet; and in response to the primary executable code snippet failing to correct said semantic errors identified for said node chosen, automatically executing the secondary executable code snippet" That is what makes Word's spell check not prior art for this patent. |
|
Sep 26 |
comment |
Prior art for a web-based system for commissioning software development Thanks @alex_chamberlain. Good title change! |
|
Sep 25 |
asked | Auto correcting semantic code errors by executing code snippets and seeing which ones produce no errors |
