Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Ping: Lew Bloch
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 23:26:16 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <itp2nf$2fs$1@dont-email.me>
References: <meevv65a675khs5c9goa9sp6f2hotf1321@4ax.com> <itojq0$erl$1@dont-email.me> <de0b1d41-f966-4514-98fc-2e24968bace9@l14g2000pro.googlegroups.com> <itolpi$v92$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 03:21:20 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="yplGUUrGzpiV4sv58weMcA"; logging-data="2556"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/uSu7I1LsEejTVdm4u8Tx8qw4abMPWRyc="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10
In-Reply-To: <itolpi$v92$1@dont-email.me>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:/9uXolmKMyh8k3Pm5PgDk20OLKs=
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:5455


I'm sorry, I use Thunderbird and eternal-september
and for some reason I can see that you have replied
but I cannot see the body of your message or reply to it.

I've retrieved some context from Google Groups and
copy/pasted, and will reply to it here.

Jeff Higgins  wrote:
 > Lew Bloch wrote:
 >> Jeff Higgins wrote:
 >>> Gene Wirchenko wrote:
 >>>> Dear Java'ers:

 >>>>        Given

 >>>> class HelloWorld
 >>>>      {
 >>>>      public static void main(String[] args)
 >>>>         {
 >>>>         System.out.println("Hello, world!");
 >>>>         }
 >>>>      }

 >>>> is there any way around the following?

 >>>> C:\cbs2dev\test>java helloworld

 >>> maybe a wrapper script

 >> That would not help in this case.  Think about the problem and you
 >> will see why.

 >> OK, I'll tell you why.  Wrapper scripts don't help in the face of
 >> egregious error.

 >> Perhaps you should be specific with your suggestion.  "Maybe a wrapper
 >> script" is about as useful as advice as "maybe a program to help
 >> you".  Could you elucidate precisely what sort of "wrapper script" you
 >> have in mind, and precisely how you believe it would help, and
 >> precisely how that would ameliorate egregious error?

 > What error?

The error the OP made.  Duhh.

Now, how about responding to the request for details instead of
continuing with vague, indirect, fairly unhelpful responses?

No, thanks. I'll await a request from the OP for clarification.