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

Groups > comp.lang.java.help > #1296

Re: Enum basics

Show all headers | View raw

On 11/5/2011 4:06 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> Lew's claim seems to be that any programmer can read the JLS. Roedy's
> claim seems to be that JLS reading is a specialized skill, distinct
> from, and in addition to, general programming skill.

 From my perspective (one I've inherited from others), the critical 
skill needed in programming is not mathematics or logic but actually 
plain old reading and writing skills. In that vein, general programming 
skill amounts to being able comprehend and communicate the various 
requirements of programs, which includes being able to comprehend a 
formal document of underlying semantics of the language (like the JLS). 
In other words, to have general programming skill is, in part, to be 
able to read a well-written language standard [1].

> I'm interpreting "a programmer" as someone who can program, without
> requiring any other skill. This question could easily become circular if
> inability to read the JLS were treated as evidence of not being a
> programmer.

I will admit that my definition of general programming skill leaves open 
the possibility (indeed, probability) that there exist large numbers of 
programmers who do not have general programming skill. I therefore 
object to the use of the term "a programmer" in favor of either "a 
competent programmer," "a skilled programmer," or "a good programmer."

> Can you understand the JLS?

I too would consider myself a language lawyer, but Java is the first 
programming language I truly learned and also the first language where I 
discovered the formal specification, so I started reading and 
understanding it before I became a language lawyer.

That said, I can definitely see a few places in the language where good 
technical writing was eschewed in favor of mathematical detail and 
precision (the rules for generics, particularly generic type inference, 
and the memory model are the best examples). Perhaps that is 
unavoidable; on the other hand, the fact that the number of examples and 
side discussions in these sections drop dramatically is probably a sign 
that the authors didn't try hard enough to make this more easily accessible.

[1] Not all language standards are well-written. However, of all the 
standards I have read, I have found the JLS (and associated standard API 
documentation) to be among the clearest examples of well-written 
specifications.

-- 
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not 
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth

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

Thread

Enum basics Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-11-04 15:11 -0700
  Re: Enum basics "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-11-04 20:44 -0400
    Re: Enum basics Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-04 20:27 -0700
      Re: Enum basics "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-11-05 02:23 -0400
        Re: Enum basics Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-05 00:51 -0700
      Re: Enum basics Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-11-05 04:12 -0700
        Re: Enum basics Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-05 09:15 -0700
          Re: Enum basics Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-11-05 14:06 -0700
            Re: Enum basics Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-05 15:54 -0700
            Re: Enum basics Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-11-05 20:43 -0300
            Re: Enum basics markspace <-@.> - 2011-11-05 19:55 -0700
            Re: Enum basics Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-11-05 22:10 -0500
  Re: Enum basics Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-11-05 04:18 -0700

csiph-web