Appeal No. 2001-0653
Application 08/820,736
area" and "procedure counter area," claim 32 is not separately
argued for Group 1. Furthermore, appellants have not argued that
all the data structures of Figs. 2 and 3 should be read into
these terms; e.g., that the procedure counter area in Fig. 3
should be interpreted in light of the specification as having a
header information 50, control flow counters 52, direct call site
counters 54, and indirect call site counters 56.
Appellants further argue (Br9):
Applicants' claimed utilization of procedure specific
data storage areas is in contrast to conventional profilers
that store and organize profile data merely on a program-by-
program basis. The profile data is generated for various
regions of a program based upon the insertion of profiling
hooks within specific regions of a program. Certainly, if a
hook is placed in a specific procedure, profile data
specific to that procedure will be created. However, there
is no disclosure or suggestion in the art of storing such
profile data in a procedure specific data storage area.
Storage of the profile data in conventional profiles is
still on a program-by-program basis.
The examiner responds that procedure storage areas are
taught by Profiler (EA24).
Profiler stores profile information about each module of the
program and each area (routine or procedure) in the module as
evidenced by the fact that it can display the profile statistics
according to the module and area (procedure) in the Execution
Profile window (pp. 13-14 & 55-56). The procedure counter and
time areas shown in Figure 4.1 (p. 130) clearly show that
Profiler stores procedure specific data. Claim 1 does not
- 15 -
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007