Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.utanet.at!newscore.univie.ac.at!aconews-feed.univie.ac.at!aconews.univie.ac.at!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer From: Andreas Leitgeb Subject: Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 References: <4e3745a2$0$305$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <62239393-929c-4764-8c8e-9620a03a7b81@c29g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> <80346568-647c-4e27-8192-33e1765a09ce@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com> Reply-To: avl@logic.at User-Agent: slrn/pre0.9.9-111 (Linux) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: 10 Aug 2011 21:39:26 GMT Lines: 16 NNTP-Posting-Host: gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at X-Trace: 1313012366 tunews.univie.ac.at 71616 128.130.175.3 X-Complaints-To: abuse@tuwien.ac.at Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:6990 Lew wrote: > Volker Borchert wrote: >> if (l instanceof RandomAccess) { > Tests on type like this are an antipattern. > Like many antipatterns there are occasions when one might > consider its use anyway, but it's a red flag that we're > probably going about things the wrong way. Are marker-interfaces (which RandomAccess is, iirc) already an antipattern, or is there a different way to check for them, or are marker-interfaces just one of the occasions where one would just acknowledge and consciously ignore the red flag? PS: I fully agree with your judgement *outside* the context of marker-interfaces, and am eager to learn *inside* that context.