Appeal No. 1996-3076
Application 08/118,773
stamp does not disclose retaining status tables
corresponding to previous observation cycles. For this
reason, the anticipation rejection of claims 1, 2, and 16
must be reversed. Nevertheless, we go on to consider the
rest of claim 1.
The Examiner reads the step of "beginning with the
observed application program, automatically loading an
address table directly accessible from outside the
application program, including the instantaneous addresses
of blocks of information relating to the execution of the
observed program, in particular an address of a code of a
function being executed and an address of the contents of an
instantaneous context associated with the function" on
Figure 2, page 199, and on the statement that "[t]he local
monitoring software is loaded together with information
gathered during the compilation of program units . . ."
(page 200, col. 2). Appellant argues that this
interpretation is untenable (Br11).
The sentences following the one relied on by the
Examiner in the paragraph on page 200 of Dieter state:
"This compiler information, as we call it, contains all
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007