http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
개별검색 DB통합검색이 안되는 DB는 DB아이콘을 클릭하여 이용하실 수 있습니다.
통계정보 및 조사
예술 / 패션
<해외전자자료 이용권한 안내>
- 이용 대상 : RISS의 모든 해외전자자료는 교수, 강사, 대학(원)생, 연구원, 대학직원에 한하여(로그인 필수) 이용 가능
- 구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색 및 등록된 대학IP 대역 내에서 24시간 무료 이용
- 미구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색을 통한 오후 4시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용
※ 단, EBSCO ASC/BSC(오후 5시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용)
本 論文에서는 各 basic block間의 global data analysis에 依해 microoperation(Mop's)을 효율적인 microins truction(MI's)으로 결합하는 廣域的 最適化(Global compaction) 알고리즘을 提案한다. 즉, microprogram의 廣域的 고찰을 통해 全體遂行時間 및 製御記憶容量을 減少시킨다. 또한, 알고리즘을 프로그램하고 가상 machine에 적용하여 本 알고리즘의 最適化를 立證한다. In this paper, a global compaction algorithm of microprograms, which combines microoperations (MOP's) into effective microinstructions (MI's) by global data analysis over basic blocks, is proposed. The algorithm reduces total execution time and control memory space, and improves the execution efficiency through a broad view of microprograms. Also, it is implemented and tested on virtual machine, and the result of it's compaction is verified.
This is the study about how to revise our current design act. Our current design act consists of the substantial examination system(SES) and non-substantial examination system(NSES). From 1998 we have a dual system. We introduced the NSES for the short-term life cycled products. The rights conferred through SES and NSES are same: monopolistic right. So many designs without qualification have exclusive rights. Those are hindering the development of design industry. It must be changed. This paper propose the abolishment of dual system. But it does not mean to turn back to the pre-1998 system. It is out of date and inefficient for all designs to be examined substantially to be registered. Even though all designs should be registered to gain the design right, it need not be examined whether it fulfills the substantial requirement. If only formal and procedural requirements are fulfilled, it could be registered. But before the right-h이der enforce the right it must be undergone substantial examination. So substantial examination is pre-requite for the enforcement. It must be based on the request of right holder. The time of the request for the examination must be limited like patent law. The nature of right from registration is monopolistic and the right has a block effect. This paper opposed the two-tier system: opposition to the adoption of unregistered design right system(UDRS). The major problem is the uncertainty. As [Australian Law Reform Report] says a manufacturer may be uncertain whether his or her product is so similar that it will be taken to be a copy. And in a sense we have already UDRS. It is in the Unfair Competition Law and Copyright Law. Not common-place design is protected from so-called dead copy by Unfair Competition Law, and copyright law protect some designs from copying. So there is no need to introduce the UDRS into the Design Protection Act itself.
본 논문에서는 C언어와 유사한 구조를 갖는 머신 독립적인 고급 마이크로프로그래밍 언어 HLML-C(High Level Microprogramming Language C) 언어를 제안한다. 즉, 다양한 머신의 특성을 고려하여 일반화시킨 추상화머신(abstract machine)상의 오퍼레이션을 정의하여 머신 독립적으로 추상화머신의 중간언어를 생성하고, 대상머신 종속적인 특수한 오퍼레이션의 확장 적용이 가능한 머신 독립적인 고급 마이크로프로그래밍 언어를 제안한다. 본 HLML-C 컴파일러는 VAX 11/750상에서 yacc와 C언어로써 실현한다.
'스콜라' 이용 시 소속기관이 구독 중이 아닌 경우, 오후 4시부터 익일 오전 7시까지 원문보기가 가능합니다.
The Revised Bill of Patent Law §2 ⅲ (a) is as follows: (a) in the case of an invention of a thing (including a computer program, etc., the same shall apply hereinafter), producing, using, assigning, etc. (assigning and leasing and, in the case where the product is a computer program, etc., including providing through an electric telecommunication line, the same shall apply hereinafter), exporting or importing, or offering for assignment, etc. (including displaying for the purpose of assignment, etc., the same shall apply hereinafter) thereof. 4. A “computer program, etc.” in this Act means a computer program (a set of instructions given to an electronic computer which are combined in order to produce a specific result, hereinafter the same shall apply in this paragraph) and any other information that is to be processed by an electronic computer equivalent to a computer program I do not agree on this revised bill. Because it is away from common sense: the program as such is not a thing. As the bill defined, a computer program is a set of instructions given to an electronic computer. The instructions are not things. And the greater parts of computer programs are not the highly advanced creation of technical ideas by which a law of nature is utilized. When patent act protect the program broadly, it is serious conflict with copyright law, which is the primary protection law of computer program. The bill is contrary to the global trends. Even in US, All computer programs are not protected by patent law. In the view of IP policy it is not recommendable.