Timeline for Looking for prior art for patent application US20140196015 "Declaration of Lifetime resource reference"
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 18, 2020 at 8:26 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Sep 5, 2014 at 15:40 | vote | accept | Daniel Fath | ||
| Aug 27, 2014 at 15:41 | comment | added | strcat | The patent isn't about ownership or scope-based destructors. It covers tracking the lifetimes of non-owning references to those resources / stack allocations with region typing. Just because something has the word scope in it or has to do with lifetimes doesn't mean it's the same thing as they're describing here. It doesn't have to do with being explicit about stack vs. heap allocation either. | |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 7:18 | comment | added | Max | Can you scope classes without the scope attribute in D? I haven't read the whole patent but it seems to me the claim can. @strcat can you post an example? I had quick look at Rust and to me it seems the programmer can be explicit about stack vs heap allocation. | |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 0:28 | comment | added | George White♦ | I added claim 1 and posted a comment with erroneous information. That is what strcat references above. I deleted the technically way off-base comment. | |
| Aug 26, 2014 at 23:15 | comment | added | strcat | I don't understand what you're referring to by the passage of time. Rust's reference lifetimes correspond to an object's scope, and prevent the reference from outliving the live scope. The Rust compiler infers most of the lifetimes, but it is possible and sometimes necessary to annotate references with a lifetime. It's exactly what the patent's abstract is referring to, as it's nowhere near a new concept. Cyclone is a much earlier example of prior art. | |
| Aug 26, 2014 at 21:28 | review | First posts | |||
| Sep 2, 2014 at 15:29 | |||||
| Aug 26, 2014 at 21:23 | history | answered | Hugo Dubé | CC BY-SA 3.0 |