Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!feeder.news-service.com!postnews.google.com!eb1g2000vbb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Paul Cager <paul.cager@googlemail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: CLI Java Glitch
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 14:45:01 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <ff9e9d68-d80f-41c8-883b-6bdc8815701e@eb1g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
References: <meevv65a675khs5c9goa9sp6f2hotf1321@4ax.com> <itogee$k8r$1@localhost.localdomain> <4dffe2ea$0$57121$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1106212245430.6476@urchin.earth.li> <96dvubFalpU1@mid.individual.net> <bl8407hdidgaku9tdra4i2lpgefhg7e9b9@4ax.com> <3qOdnSBTduuqsp_TnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <7sd407hclqd092brj1cgqmlk4r129bcqb4@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.15.224.14
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1308779101 19976 127.0.0.1 (22 Jun 2011 21:45:01 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 21:45:01 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: eb1g2000vbb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=86.15.224.14; posting-account=VsWLXwoAAAB13M2Ptt5-Bo-K_zCx-zyw
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: HNKRUAELSC
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Ubuntu/10.10 Chromium/12.0.742.91 Chrome/12.0.742.91 Safari/534.30,gzip(gfe)
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:5551

On Jun 22, 7:46=A0pm, Gene Wirchenko <ge...@ocis.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2011 11:06:38 -0700, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org>
> wrote:
> >Of course, javac and java are both used by many users. How do you
> >propose to let "the user" be the one to prevail, when there are
> >thousands of users with different backgrounds and interface expectations=
?
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0Easy on this point. =A0Accepting case-insensitive filenames as
> matching when there is no ambiguity is more helpful to more users than
> throwing an error is.

My preference is to retain the current situation where the 'java'
command consistently rejects a wrong classname. I prefer consistent
behaviour over the ability to type the class name without pressing the
shift key (in most cases).

Your preference, I believe, is the opposite.

I don't think either of us should present our personal preference as
being "more helpful to more users" without being reasonably certain
that we speak for the majority of users.