Revisiting exceptions

[Fabian Cenedese]

>> 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: http://www.mega-tokyo.com/osfaq2/index.php/Doing%20a%20kernel%20in%20C++?version=18

-----------snip
http://www.codeproject.com/cpp/exceptionhandler.asp (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, 

http://www.microsoft.com/msj/0197/Exception/Exception.aspx 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)
-----------snip

The link to the patent is (without really reading all of it :)

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,628,016.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