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


Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #7635

Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc)

Date 2011-09-06 13:38 -0700
From Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org>
Newsgroups comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc)
References (7 earlier) <j3u3me$k4s$1@news.albasani.net> <4e655c24$0$308$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <j44ga5$970$1@news.albasani.net> <826a6f26-c540-4ee9-a0c6-1cf77f20d765@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com> <j44r3p$1s3$1@news.albasani.net>
Message-ID <89qdnfwsp9pQGfvTnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@earthlink.com> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw


On 9/6/2011 3:02 AM, Jan Burse wrote:
...
> Maybe this is based on a general assumption that javadocs
> are above critique. But I think javadocs can be buggy
> in the same way that code can be buggy. They are just
> written by someone, and it can be that this someone had
> good intentions, but nevertheless something went wrong.
...

There are actually two categories of documentation involved here,
prescriptive standards and implementation descriptions.

The prescriptive standards are inherently "right", regardless of whether
or not I agree with the decisions involved, in the sense that they
define Java. A BigInteger implementation whose bit operations do not
follow 2's complement semantics would be wrong by definition. A Java
core API implementer does not have the option of changing the
documentation rather than code.

The descriptive information can indeed be wrong. I've written material
that went into Sun Microsystems technical documentation in other areas,
not Java, and I can definitely make mistakes.

However, in this case I've examined ground truth in the sense of reading
the Android BigInteger implementation. It definitely uses the simple,
reliable, but inefficient approach of converting to 2's complement from
internal representation to do bit operations. Given that, it seems
helpful of them to point out the inefficiency and advise use of BitSet
instead.

You may not agree with the trade-off they made, but that would not make
the note false.

Patricia

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar


Thread

BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-02 21:48 +0200
  Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-02 16:23 -0400
    Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-02 13:34 -0700
      Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-02 22:51 +0200
        Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-02 18:58 -0700
          Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-03 20:15 +0200
            Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-03 12:37 -0700
              Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-03 22:46 +0200
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-03 16:32 -0700
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-04 02:58 +0200
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-05 19:32 -0400
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 08:58 +0200
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-06 00:41 -0700
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 11:57 +0200
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 12:12 +0200
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 12:44 +0200
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 12:02 +0200
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-06 13:38 -0700
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-06 10:33 -0700
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 22:28 +0200
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 22:41 +0200
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-06 14:34 -0700
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-06 14:51 -0700
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-07 00:33 +0200
                Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-07 00:40 +0200
            Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-05 19:26 -0400
      Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-09-03 17:01 +0200
    Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-02 22:49 +0200
      Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-09-02 14:48 -0700
  Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-09-03 13:54 -0400

csiph-web