Appeal No. 1997-1212
Application 08/017,839
stated deciding" (FR4). Claim 6 recites "said step of
sequentially executing in accordance with a program
statement for outputting said information when it is not
possible to decide whether said program portion is
parallelizable," whereas claim 5 recites "sequentially
executing . . . upon a determination in the step of deciding
that said program portion is parallelizable" (emphasis
added). Actually, it appears that the problem lies in
claim 5 rather than claim 6.
Claim 5 recites "sequentially executing said source
program to generate an execution output, upon a
determination in the step of deciding that said program
portion is parallelizable" (emphasis added) and then
"deciding . . . whether said program portion is
parallelizable in accordance with the execution output."
This is misdescriptive, since it recites deciding whether
the program portion is parallelizable after determining that
it is parallelizable. The executing step should take place
when it is not possible to decide whether the program
portion is parallelizable as stated in originally filed
claim 5; see also specification, page 7, line 10, to page 8,
- 9 -
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007