Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #2901

Re: Binary Search

From	Lew <noone@lewscanon.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject	Re: Binary Search
Date	2011-04-06 15:24 -0400
Organization	albasani.net
Message-ID	<inielt$uok$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink)
References	(10 earlier) <in8crk$og2$1@dont-email.me> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1104031840110.11872@urchin.earth.li> <inahvd$qt$1@dont-email.me> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1104032234030.11872@urchin.earth.li> <inb0bd$gsn$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

Mike Schilling wrote:
> Fair point. This was simpler before generics, when the Comparator could accept
> either K's [sic] or T's [sic] :-)

Without further consideration I won't yet claim this is one of those times, 
but sometimes simpler is not better.

The generics notion, with which I agree but others might not, is that the 
complexity of generics buys you locked-down type assertions.

In the simpler way, you compare Ts and Ks willy-nilly, without really saying 
so.  Sure it works, but it's hidden.

With generics, you have to show the type relationship explicitly.  This seems 
consistent with Java's policy of dragging out every possible elucidation of 
your algorithm, data structures and type structures at compile time without 
regard for index-finger RMI.  This is supposed to be good, both documenting 
and enforcing the type analysis.

But the downside is that rigorous, explicit, very-carefully-thought-out and 
thorough analysis is hard work.  Work that professionals do anyway.  Tough 
programmers, tough on bugs.  Hoo-rah!

-- 
Lew
Honi soit qui mal y pense.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Friz.jpg

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

Thread

Re: Binary Search Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-04-02 22:00 +1300
  Re: Binary Search Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-02 05:07 -0500
    Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 07:59 -0700
      Re: Binary Search Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-02 10:37 -0500
        Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 08:57 -0700
          Re: Binary Search Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-04-03 12:40 +1200
  Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 07:58 -0700
    Re: Binary Search Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-02 11:11 -0400
      Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 08:58 -0700
    Re: Binary Search Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-03 00:11 +0100
      Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 16:52 -0700
        Re: Binary Search Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-03 18:50 +0100
          Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-03 12:01 -0700
            Re: Binary Search Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-03 22:39 +0100
              Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-03 16:37 -0700
                Re: Binary Search Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-06 15:24 -0400
                OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm@myrealbox.com> - 2011-04-11 13:53 +0000
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-11 11:45 -0700
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-11 14:11 -0500
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-11 13:48 -0700
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-11 22:16 +0100
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-11 17:54 -0400
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-11 23:35 +0100
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-11 21:41 -0500
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm@myrealbox.com> - 2011-04-14 10:11 +0000
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Jerry Gerrone <scuzwalla@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 20:12 -0700
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-04-26 22:53 +0100
      Re: Binary Search Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-04-05 16:01 +0100

csiph-web