From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.107.138.223 with SMTP id c92mr4792200ioj.85.1523547126026;
        Thu, 12 Apr 2018 08:32:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:3286:: with SMTP id u6-v6mr65420otb.13.1523547125855;
 Thu, 12 Apr 2018 08:32:05 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.unit0.net!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!e130-v6no740570itb.0!news-out.google.com!u64-v6ni1086itb.0!nntp.google.com!k65-v6no747181ita.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 08:32:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <pa9ajt$oh$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=47.185.233.194;
 posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo
NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.185.233.194
References: <1d9faa0f-d3d7-4eb4-aa88-b50ed1e9aac3@googlegroups.com>
 <pa9ajt$oh$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <392f76ef-c0cd-46cf-acd2-b533132539fa@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Generic library design
From: "Dan'l Miller" <optikos@verizon.net>
Injection-Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:32:06 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2531
X-Received-Body-CRC: 1675279068
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:51467
Date: 2018-04-12T08:32:05-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Friday, April 6, 2018 at 9:32:30 PM UTC-5, Randy Brukardt wrote:
> Note that argubly sharing based on generic parameters is (was?) patented =
and=20
> not usable by implementers without legal issues.

Would you know any clues on how to track that patent down?  Assignee corpor=
ation?  Inventors?  Patent number?  Btw, if it isn't RR Software and that p=
atent isn't decades old, then either they patented a significantly differen=
t technique or Janus Ada's long-standing capability on this topic clearly i=
nvalidates their patent as their mere mimicking of long-standing & widely-d=
isseminated existing practice within Janus Ada, assuming that decades old v=
ersions of publicly-for-sale Janus Ada are still extant and still execute.

Perhaps on a different note, I see that Oracle has been quite active in rec=
ent years regarding the application for patents in the parameterized-type c=
onceptual-space regarding compilers.  Apparently a strategy over there is t=
o try to assure that only Java has all the cool toys in their toybox, leavi=
ng Ada, C++, OCaml, C#, and so forth with older-era technology for 20 years=
.  One inventor's name keeps recurring on nearly every one of those patents=
.