Xref: utzoo gnu.misc.discuss:3058 comp.org.usenix:2066
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!stanford.edu!apple!fernwood!dumbcat!marc
From: marc@dumbcat.sf.ca.us (Marco S Hyman)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.org.usenix
Subject: Re: How come include file patent isn't mentioned in position paper?
Message-ID: <301@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>
Date: 12 May 91 01:26:38 GMT
References: <14730@ulysses.att.com> <1991May10.072503.5575@Think.COM> <BZS.91May10200405@world.std.com>
Followup-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Distribution: usa
Organization: MH Software, Hayward, CA.
Lines: 35

In article <BZS.91May10200405@world.std.com> bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:
 > 
 > From: barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin)
 > >This sounds much fancier than the standard #include file mechanism.  Most
 > >#include facilities don't have any way to specify portions of files, only
 > >whole files.
 > 
 > Sure they do:

 [[ description of #define method of partial file inclusion deleted ]]

Some compilers provided support for partial file inclusion, too. The
Burroughs algol (and derivative) compilers had a compiler command named:

    $ include <file option> <start option> <stop option>

You could do things like

    $ include "filename" 100 500    % include lines 100 - 500 from "filename"

and then later in the code say

    $ include			% includes the remainder of the last file.

I just refreshed my memory from a book published in '77.  The idea could be
much older than that.  Certainly it's nothing new.

 > Is any of this relevant to the issue?)

Don't know.

// marc
-- 
// home: marc@dumbcat.sf.ca.us		pacbell!dumbcat!marc
// work: marc@ascend.com		uunet!aria!marc