Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #11369
| From | Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Blocks for scope control |
| Date | 2012-01-15 15:45 -0800 |
| Organization | albasani.net |
| Message-ID | <jevoes$qru$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink) |
| References | <dBCQq.122$d%2.16@newsfe07.iad> <jev7op$j4k$1@news.albasani.net> <IRHQq.2650$2C.1194@newsfe20.iad> |
Arved Sandstrom wrote: > Lew wrote: >> There are many, many idioms in Java that are woefully underused. Okay, not all that many, but some. >> 'assert' is the prime example. People don't understand it, even >> excoriate it (strange as that seems), and it's been around about a >> decade, since Java 1.4. Lack of use does not equate to lack of value. >> > Quite apart from (lack of) understanding as to how to apply assertions > effectively and correctly, I believe that there are other reasons why > they are not more widely used. Some are good, some not so good, some are > neutral. > > I'm with you on this one, though. I like assertions and use them. I am curious as to the "good" reasons why they're not more widely used. I can think of none I'd categorize as "good". There are good reasons not to use them in certain scenarios, e.g., they are not intended nor should be used for checking arguments to public methods, but that doesn't speak to why 'assert' isn't more widely used for the intended use cases. -- 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 | Unroll thread
Blocks for scope control Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-01-15 11:50 -0400
Re: Blocks for scope control Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-15 17:10 +0100
Re: Blocks for scope control Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-15 17:32 +0100
Re: Blocks for scope control Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-15 11:21 -0800
Re: Blocks for scope control Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-16 07:59 +0100
Re: Blocks for scope control markspace <-@.> - 2012-01-15 09:57 -0800
Re: Blocks for scope control Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-15 11:28 -0800
Re: Blocks for scope control Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-15 11:00 -0800
Re: Blocks for scope control Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-01-15 17:49 -0400
Re: Blocks for scope control Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-15 15:45 -0800
Re: Blocks for scope control Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-01-19 21:54 -0400
Re: Blocks for scope control Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-20 08:41 +0100
Re: Blocks for scope control Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-20 15:24 -0800
Re: Blocks for scope control Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-01-20 19:30 -0400
Re: Blocks for scope control Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-20 15:54 -0800
Re: Blocks for scope control Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-16 07:55 +0100
Re: Blocks for scope control Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-01-19 21:16 -0400
Re: Blocks for scope control Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-21 13:25 +0100
Re: Blocks for scope control Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-01-21 10:41 -0400
Re: Blocks for scope control Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-22 13:03 +0100
Re: Blocks for scope control Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-01-16 06:09 -0800
Re: Blocks for scope control Henk van Voorthuijsen <voorth@xs4all.nl> - 2012-01-16 07:03 -0800
Re: Blocks for scope control Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-01-17 18:43 -0500
Re: Blocks for scope control Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-20 11:05 -0800
Re: Blocks for scope control Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-20 12:11 -0800
Re: Blocks for scope control Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-06 21:24 -0500
csiph-web