Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Novice Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Aspect questions? Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 15:25:55 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Your Company Lines: 54 Message-ID: References: <4f4a6b1d$0$290$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: Dmxgbnvd+eoRDUV2lwYf7Q.user.speranza.aioe.org X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25 X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 120229-0, 2012-02-29), Outbound message Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:12531 Martin Gregorie wrote in news:jijmqt$m5f$1@localhost.localdomain: > On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 02:04:44 +0000, Novice wrote: > >> I'm surprised that your common class is so small in terms of number >> of classes, especially after 10 years! I would have thought you'd >> have written many more by now.... >> > I don't add anything to my environ package until (a) its been written > because I needed it in some program I was working on and (b) I needed > it in another unrelated program. Unless/until both conditions are met > it remains a part of the original project-specific package. > I'm basically doing the same thing, except that in some cases when I write something new for Project X, I feel sure it will get used again in upcoming projects (or be retrofitted to existing incomplete projects) so I put it in Common straightaway. > I'd previously done the same in C: this library would be similarly > small except that programs that use it are written to run on OS/9, > DOS/Windows and Linux. The functions making up the standard C > libraries are not the same. As a result the library exists in three > versions, one for each OS, and each is augmented with functions that I > need that are standard in one of the other OSen. At most this > requirement has doubled the size of the environ library and, as you > might expect, this part of its content is similarly static. Not having > to write these compatibility functions is a big advantage of using a > WORA language like Java. > I was a neophyte C programmer in the early/mid 90s and had written one real program in that language to run in DOS. (A couple of friends who were very skilled in C helped me over the rough spots.) I was just starting to be keen on the language but then discovered that it was a big can of worms to try to port C to other platforms. I got very uneasy about that and looked around for other alternatives. I discovered that Java, which was very much in its infancy, was designed to run on lots of other platforms without all the work involved in porting C and that it started with the same syntax as C _and_ added classes like C++ (which I was also in the very early stage of learning). Well, I was sold and moved over to Java right away and have few regrets. (There are times I wish I had also improved my C and learned more about C++ but I suspect that would have started muddling them altogether a bit if I had done that.) I envy you for being fluent in both C and Java (and probably others!). I have other languages but they're pretty much all very rusty from lack of use. Mind you, I have found that I can relearn things pretty quickly even after a long gap. I had occasion to look at a COBOL program a few years back and found it very familiar. Mind you, I doubt I'd say the same about C if I were to try that again ;-) -- Novice