Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.help > #529

Re: Class ... implements ...

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/3/2011 3:45 PM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Eric Sosman<esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid>  writes:
>
>> On 4/3/2011 11:31 AM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>>> Eric Sosman<esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid>   writes:
>>>> [...]
>>>> I predict you will get compile-time
>>>> errors for all five of them.
>>>
>>> Okay, I just tested and received the results I wrote before.
>>> [...]
>>> Do you have an explanation about your way of reasoning? My compiler
>>> might be too old, or something like that.
>>
>>      I think it less likely that your compiler is broken than that
>> you put the wrong code through it.  Allow me to draw your attention
>> to method f() of class C2: What value does it return?  (In the
>> version you posted, not the version you've been compiling.)
>
> It returns nothing, but as it is declared as an int method, it needs
> to return an int. Well, I added return n. What I sent over the valid
> and non valid instructions is effectively what I got by compiling the
> same code, but with a return where it was missing.
>
> I now understand your
> answer. I can't understand why people are sometimes so `picky' in some
> answers. This often go anti-pedagogical.

     If you pose a question that requires the answerer to imagine
some kind of repair or completion, different answerers are likely to
imagine different completions and may therefore give different
answers.  One reader fleshes out your code *this* way and says "Yes,"
another completes it *that* way and says "No."  Who's right?  Both!
What have you learned, having been told both "Yes" and "No?"  Nothing!

     If you dislike pickiness, get out of programming.  Seriously.  The
computer is far, far pickier than any human can be.

> That reminds me an oral exam. I had to prove some theorem on the board, wrote
> something like 98% of the proof, but forgot some things. Well, the
> proof was not complete, and the theorem was thus unproved, but is it a
> reason to say `totally erroneous?' Sure not, at least to me. It is
> better to say `well, you forgot some things.' Especially when the
> related mark is however high. This got many students completely
> frustrated, shocked, and unable to answer anymore at an oral. This is
> not what needs to be evaluated at an oral exam!

     Writing on a blackboard and waving your hands and operating the
smoke-and-mirrors machine for a human audience is one thing; writing
code and giving it to a completely unimaginative compiler is another.
If you think you can write 98% of a program and have it work, you are
in the wrong line of work altogether.

     (Also, I did not use the phrase "totally erroneous."  I called
your code "a half-remembered half-accurate half-assed approximation."
I'm not sure "totally erroneous" is even possible, since there does
not seem to be an upper bound on error: Any program, however bad, can
always be disimproved -- or so I suspect.)

> Here, if I may, you answered correctly the question, but note that it
> brought me nothing interesting, simply because I did not understand
> your message, even if it was perfectly correct and irreproachable.

     That's because you're lazy.  Or inattentive.  Or both.

> Wouldn't it have been simpler, more pedagogic, and even `friendler,'
> to say `this way, there will be a problem with some method. Check it,
> because this is surely not the aim of this exercise.'

     Have you heard about giving a man a fish versus teaching him to
fish?  Here's the point: You have questions about Code Sample A, and
you show us Code Sample B instead.  Therefore you get wrong answers.
My pedagogic purpose was to teach you the folly of pretending A == B.
I claim that my purpose has been achieved: You have been taught the
lesson, even though you clearly resent learning it.

     Besides, you have already told us that you do not wish to learn
Java "in depth," so why complain about shallow answers?  It's odd for
an admitted non-learner to harp on pedagogy.

-- 
Eric Sosman
esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid

Back to comp.lang.java.help | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-02 22:13 +0200
  Re: Class ... implements ... Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-02 17:30 -0400
    Re: Class ... implements ... Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-04-02 23:09 -0700
    Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 12:00 +0200
  Re: Class ... implements ... Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-04-02 20:53 -0700
    Re: Class ... implements ... Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10@netscape.net> - 2011-04-03 10:15 +0300
  Re: Class ... implements ... Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-04-03 08:42 -0400
    Re: Class ... implements ... Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-04-03 06:45 -0700
      Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 17:29 +0200
        Re: Class ... implements ... Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-04-03 09:01 -0700
          Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 18:10 +0200
            Re: Class ... implements ... Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-04-03 09:32 -0700
              Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 18:48 +0200
        Re: Class ... implements ... Aéris <aeris@imirhil.fr> - 2011-04-03 18:07 +0200
          Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 18:22 +0200
            Re: Class ... implements ... Aéris <aeris@imirhil.fr> - 2011-04-03 19:02 +0200
              Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 20:15 +0200
      Re: Class ... implements ... Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-06 12:01 -0400
    Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 17:27 +0200
      Re: Class ... implements ... Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-04-03 14:26 -0400
      Re: Class ... implements ... Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-04-03 16:14 -0300
        Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 21:33 +0200
          Re: Class ... implements ... Aéris <aeris@imirhil.fr> - 2011-04-03 22:13 +0200
            Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 22:24 +0200
      Re: Class ... implements ... Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-06 12:05 -0400
    Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 17:31 +0200
      Re: Class ... implements ... Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-04-03 14:41 -0400
        Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 21:45 +0200
          Re: Class ... implements ... Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-04-03 16:40 -0400
            Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 22:58 +0200
              Re: Class ... implements ... Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-06 12:13 -0400
          Re: Class ... implements ... Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-06 12:10 -0400
        Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 21:51 +0200
          Re: Class ... implements ... Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-04-03 13:02 -0700
            Re: Class ... implements ... Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-04-03 22:23 +0200
          Re: Class ... implements ... Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-06 12:15 -0400
      Re: Class ... implements ... Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-06 12:08 -0400

csiph-web