Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Lew Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 17:33:02 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 44 Message-ID: <87ccaa45-1ee7-4de2-850b-ff8ce85c4ec0@googlegroups.com> References: <2d84a3f9-fd83-42ae-a841-629d1e420752@googlegroups.com> <500f2352$0$282$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <54a01892mkfhftospg8c8r9h24mn35arcj@4ax.com> <250720121505132854%jimsgibson@gmail.com> <501082cb$0$281$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <50109693$0$292$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <501b12a5$0$285$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.28.149.29 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1343954061 24682 127.0.0.1 (3 Aug 2012 00:34:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 00:34:21 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <501b12a5$0$285$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=69.28.149.29; posting-account=CP-lKQoAAAAGtB5diOuGlDQk0jIwmH0T User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-Received-Bytes: 2891 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:17017 Arne Vajh=F8j wrote: > Lew wrote: >> Wanja Gayk wrote: >>> Arne Vajh=F8j says... >>>>> I already have a multi-language style for indenting, variable >>>>> naming, etc. I see no reason to change it for Java. >>>> Maybe not. >>>> >>>> But it is still a bad idea. >>>> >>>> And it indicates that you are not interested in doing things the Java = way. >>> >>> "You can write FORTRAN in any language." >>>=20 >>> http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3D1039535 >> Funny, but it ducks the point. >> >> And further indicates that you are not interested in doing things the Ja= va way. >> >> I know you're proud of that, but it's actually a bad thing when you're d= oing Java. >=20 > Somehow I think you have gotten Wanja and Gene mixed up. The lack of attributions in the post I answered is what I choose to blame.= =20 Yes, I should have researched the upthread context. So OK, I blame myself. > I have no reason to believe that Wanja is anti-"Java best pracice". >=20 > In fact I see his post as being definite but subtle pro-"Java > best practice". I am embarrassed. You are exactly right. I apologize, Wanja. I missed your point completely. --=20 Lew