> C S Hendrix <shendrix@escape.widomaker.com> writes:
> > In message <3682cf95.1309356@mail.cloud9.net>, John Alvord writes:
> > > I suspect gcc will have a much improved register allocation scheme in
> > > 2003 for the same reason.
> >
> > If someone were to go ahead and write the code now, I'd use it.
> >
> > Has anyone ever asked for permission to use that patent?
>
> It would be silly to implement the original Chaitin colouring
> allocator in gcc today. It is by now thoroughly outdated. While the
> gcc allocator is not brilliant, it is certainly better than a straight
> implementation of the original Chaitin allocator.
Not really my point. I just wondered if anyone has ever tried to
secure permission or get them to free up that patent so that mods
to gcc can be made without worrying about the patent being used to
stop development.
Is this the only register related patent?
> generated code on modern load/store architectures. Even ignoring this,
> the algorithm presented in the patent can be significantly improved
> with some simple changes (which are themselves the subject of a patent
> by Rice University.
>
> If someone was seeking to completely reimplement the gcc/egcs register
> allocator, they should look at register allocation papers published
> more recently; of course, they should bear patent encumberment in mind
> as they do so.
OK... so again, has anyone asked ever asked the patent owners about
this? Just curious. I mean, if I knew how to make the changes to
gcc, I'd just ask them to release the patent or grant an exemption
for all GPL software, or whatever would be the best way to handle it.
I am still confused about section 7 of the GPL which doesn't
explicitely say you can't use patented code and seems to say it's
OK if the patent owner agrees to free distribution.
I know there is an earlier section of the GPL saying patents should
be freed but that seems more like discussion while the numbered
sections are the guts.
> This just goes to show that 17 years is too long for a software patent
> in an active research field. By the time it expires, its value is
> purely historical, thus the patent system has achieved nothing.
Yeah, well now it's 20 years, and the patent grants don't seem
to be slowing down.
-- Shannon - shendrix@widomaker.com - InfiNet? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Microsoft should switch to the vacuum cleaner business where people actually want products that suck." -- Bruno Bratti (i think)- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/