Path: csiph.com!eeepc.pasdenom.info!news.pasdenom.info!news.dougwise.org!nntpfeed.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.albasani.net!not-for-mail From: Lew Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: JLS 3/e -- Lots Of Errors Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 09:34:18 -0500 Organization: albasani.net Lines: 48 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: news.albasani.net G18P1SSjGecQRLEbtXo3wvjbZLLzjBHIkEFJ3+lL+UwjzOEhOynDsCu7pfRwu2gamyk6erZLn1jAAMlYgHF1yA== NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 14:34:16 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: Cancel-Lock: sha1:9T+NmsRarEpLiImx0Mjbu/SnJVE= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Thunderbird/3.1.7 Injection-Info: news.albasani.net; logging-data="fVONNxJomGbospRASEX0hEm8MOpSbCqtn371ijSxX+A75Tw5BfvOGNc7GCdxnRCT8YldtWGiBjEam7ojVdqTVdnPxOehUcvahtgA3C4XLmjEFigs0DcL4E4MbNZVMaJh"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@albasani.net" Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:25947 On 02/05/2011 01:42 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message, Lew wrote: > >> You may think the rules are screwy, but the JLS itself is not sloppy nor >> erroneous there. > > You don’t think it “sloppy” to have a technique recommended in one place and > deprecated in another part of the same spec? Where does that happen? You haven't cited any such thing and I don't know of such a thing. In the particular case here, Joshua Cranmer has already shown you where you went wrong. Don't you assimilate these responses, or are you simply a troll? The JLS is obfuscatory in parts, and a bit light in other parts. but I don't agree that it's "sloppy". That is not to claim it cannot be improved, but overall I find it precise and reliable. Anyway, you started this thread with the claim that the JLS is riddled with errors and typos. Now you're saying merely that it is "sloppy" (whatever that means) in parts. Some of what you offer as evidence is not sloppy, but difficult to understand and clearly you have not yet understood those parts. While I see why they're difficult to understand, as they are for me and for just about anyone, our lack of understanding is not equivalent to error or typo in the JLS. Try fixing your understanding instead of what isn't broken. If your goal is rather to troll, and refuse to accept anything that folks are telling you, I'm sorry to say you aren't being very notable. Trolls here set a much higher standard. You'll have to step it up. Start attacking us personally! Shift the ground of your discourse more. You're already on the way with erroneous statements of fact ("Virtual methods started with C++") and simple restatement of claims already refuted in the discussion. But that's kid stuff. Bring it, dude! -- Lew Ceci n'est pas une fenêtre. .___________. |###] | [###| |##/ | *\##| |#/ * | \#| |#----|----#| || | * || |o * | o| |_____|_____| |===========|