On 8/4/21 2:03 PM, Phil Bouchard via Std-Proposals wrote:


On 8/4/21 1:44 PM, Andrey Semashev via Std-Proposals wrote:
On 8/4/21 8:15 PM, Phil Bouchard via Std-Proposals wrote:

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


So sorry for the patent implications but this is the only way to protect ourselves these days.

Patents are a good way to bury your software and ideas in the sand. Sane people will be very cautious about using patented stuff and some won't even touch it with a ten feet pole. IMO, a language (extension) that builds on top of a patented technology is DOA.

Well it depends on the importance of the problem that is being fixed. But in no way Microsoft will embrace and extend my efforts anymore.

Also ISO is not Gnu GPL and they do accept patents like previously posted. And I already negotiated the framework we can share.


--

Phil Bouchard
Founder & CTO
C.: (819) 328-4743

Fornux Logo