C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: SCC / ISO IEC - C++ Superset

From: Marcin Jaczewski <marcinjaczewski86_at_[hidden]>
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2021 23:26:50 +0200
śr., 4 sie 2021 o 19:16 Phil Bouchard via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> napisał(a):

> On 8/3/21 11:41 PM, Phil Bouchard via Std-Proposals wrote:
> On 8/3/21 11:07 PM, Emile Cormier via Std-Proposals wrote:
> Sorry, but who do you expect to get involved in a C++ language extensions
> encumbered by patents? Does your "C++ Superset" allow a patent-free,
> open-source implementation?
> Part of what I mentioned is patent pending but I can certainly loosen
> restrictions, but the Root Pointer headers will remain patented.
> BTW thank God software can now be patented. Here's my anecdote:
> - I was working for Corel Linux back in 2000 until Microsoft dissolved it;
> - I wrote my own Fornux Powercalc and proposed it to Microsoft but got
> silently embraced and extended my Microsoft Powertoys:
> https://github.com/philippeb8/fcalc
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6f/Powercalc.PNG
> - Herb Sutter from Microsoft almost embraced and extended the logic of
> Root Pointer:
> https://github.com/hsutter/gcpp
> From page you posted: "Herb Sutter -- Updated 2016-10-16"
This means near 5 years ago, and you say "almost". Is this not the other
way around?
How do you want to pattern something that has a similar version that is
already publicly available?

And for calc, when you write the first version of this? your github show
only date 2019 where other link shows that it is a program for WinXP.
And even if your version 1.0 was before XP then there was already Wolfram
Mathematica 1.0 from 1988 that had bigger capabilities.
This means your calc is not something unique to steal off.

Received on 2021-08-04 16:27:03