Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!selfless.tophat.at!news.glorb.com!npeer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!news1 From: Michael Wojcik Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Class.forName().newInstance() vs new Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:29:35 -0400 Organization: Micro Focus Lines: 18 Message-ID: References: <95ho4qFd7cU1@mid.individual.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: pef496012fac6f711ca2103391299a3696e348c73b8308889.newsdawg.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090812 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 In-Reply-To: Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:5348 lewbloch wrote: > > There's some folks even more pedantic than I, apparently. Welcome to > the club, Michael. Alas, I am that most unsatisfied of creatures, a pedantic descriptivist. I am annoyed by awkward constructions but lack the consolation of labeling them as wrong. But then I do employ casual constructions and idiomatic expressions in my writing (and speech) - often even in formal writing, when appropriate for reasons of style. I was merely agreeing with John's impulse to correct the agreement in number in his first post. -- Michael Wojcik Micro Focus Rhetoric & Writing, Michigan State University