On: Someone patented linked lists

[dpark]

Sorry, this patent is invalid, but your prior art covers a different invention. Page 19 shows a singly-linked list. Page 20 shows nested lists (a list where some elements are also lists). I don't see anything in this document that covers the same type of multiply-linked lists that the patent claims.

[nitrogen → dpark]

As I vaguely alluded to in another response to one of your comments, the argument could go like this:

1. The linked list was described in 1957 or earlier.

2. The cited mention of the linked list also considers more complex permutations of lists.

3. This patent effectively describes adding a single set of items to multiple lists (I haven't read the patent, so I may be glossing over details).

4. #2 demonstrates that such a permutation of the concept of a list would be obvious to anyone skilled in the art.

5. Therefore, the patent is invalid.

[dpark → nitrogen]

Aside from it being obvious, I'm pretty sure there's prior art for specifically what this patent describes. One of the times this was posted to Reddit someone posted a link to a book that describes pretty much exactly what's in this patent, with a diagram no less. http://my.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1bbb3/congratula...