Revisiting exceptions

Fabian Cenedese Cenedese at
Mon May 9 08:04:40 CDT 2005

>> Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
>> >Because it's patented by Borland?
>> Do you have any reference to the patent? It looks to me like it is easy
>> to by-pass by using different key words and than the user can Just
>> define them to the MS ones.
>US Patent #5,628,016, Kukol, May 6, 1997.  And you can't patent a name, so 
>changing names won't help.
>But you can patent wiping your ass after defecating.  Which is basically what 
>Borland has done here.

 From this page:

-----------snip (explaining the stuff, but for VC++. Note that, on x86, VC++ and most other PC compilers use a stack-based unwinding and handling mechanism known as SEH, common to OS/2, Windows and Windows NT and described in detail in a famous MSJ article, GCC and most other UNIX compilers, instead, use the same table-based mechanism that is the rule on RISC architectures on x86 too. Also note that any use of stack-based SEH may or may not be covered by USPTO patent #5,628,016, held by Borland International, Inc. SEH on RISC architectures is table-based, thus unaffected by the patent)

The link to the patent is (without really reading all of it :),628,016.WKU.&OS=PN/5,628,016&RS=PN/5,628,016

I wonder though: if stack-based SEH is patented by Borland, does it mean
that "VC++ and most other PC compilers" pay to Borland?

bye  Fabi

More information about the wine-devel mailing list