Appeal No. 1997-2467 Page 8
Application No. 08/509,753
enter the object at different entry points. To the contrary,
the object is entered at the same entry point, viz., the
prologue address thereof. Specifically, “[i]n the direct
execution of an object, an interpreter pointer points to the
prologue address of an object.... In indirect execution of an
object the interpreter pointer points to an object pointer
which in turn points to or addresses the prologue address of
an object ....” Col. 2, ll.
6-13. Relying on Keene to “teach[] that a method object is a
type of object for the purpose of performing a function[,]”
(Examiner's Answer at 5), the examiner fails to show that the
secondary reference cures the deficiency of Patton.
Because Patton points to the prologue address of an
object for both direct and indirect execution thereof, we are
not persuaded that the reference discloses or would have
suggested the limitations of "entering said method object at
one of a first entry point to directly invoke said method body
in response to execution of the ordinary function call and a
second entry point to invoke said method body in the context
of a generic function dispatch in response to execution of the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007