Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #7022
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
|---|---|
| From | Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> |
| Subject | Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 |
| References | (6 earlier) <DlD0q.35597$g12.31437@newsfe20.iad> <slrnj462qe.6gl.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> <fNN0q.575745$SG4.165292@newsfe03.iad> <slrnj47fmu.6gl.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> <ad5e70fc-8d7b-47a7-83ff-50ec72b71faa@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com> |
| Message-ID | <slrnj4805r.6gl.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> (permalink) |
| Date | 2011-08-11 16:18 +0000 |
Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thursday, August 11, 2011 4:37:02 AM UTC-7, Andreas Leitgeb wrote: >> Arved Sandstrom <asandstr...@eastlink.ca> wrote: >> > On 11-08-10 07:50 PM, Andreas Leitgeb wrote: >> >> How would I write a method (overload) that would only take an >> >> object if it is both List and RandomAccess? (Afaik: no way, but >> >> I might perhaps miss something.) >> > Pretty much in the standard way, which would take advantage of the >> > marker interface in a way suggested by Bloch: you create an interface >> > that extends List and RandomAccess, and concrete classes implement that. >> That's just not applicable to the Collections framework as it is: >> We've all been taught to use interface-names for the static type >> of variables to hold whatever concrete implementation: >> ArrayList l = new ArrayList(); // discouraged >> List l = new ArrayList(); // encouraged > No, that's not what we've been taught. > We've been taught to use the type that most generally allows the compiler > to enforce the specific contract we need. Fair enough. If I was to write code that was supposed to work for both types (with or without a particular marker interface), then in the part for "no marker" (as statically determined) I'd better still add a runtime- check for it. In theory, theory and practise are the same, in practise they aren't. :-) >> interfaces (such as RandomAccess) are an anti-pattern themselves, or >> that pattern is one declared exception to the "instanceof"-red flag. > Marker interfaces are not an antipattern. Use of 'instanceof' is, often. > Use marker interfaces for *compile time* safety. I wonder, if that is done in practise. E.g.: do you happen to know code in the Java Standard Library or other renowned project that does this kind of static check for a marker-interface?
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-08-01 20:32 -0400
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-08-02 02:42 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 v_borchert@despammed.com (Volker Borchert) - 2011-08-02 19:32 +0000
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-08-10 09:00 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-08-10 21:39 +0000
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-08-10 19:10 -0300
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-08-10 22:50 +0000
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-08-11 07:02 -0300
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-08-11 11:37 +0000
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-08-11 07:14 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-08-11 16:18 +0000
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-08-11 17:39 -0300
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-08-12 08:09 +0000
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-08-11 09:52 -0400
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-08-11 17:26 -0300
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-08-11 20:11 -0400
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-08-10 20:31 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-08-11 16:07 +0000
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-08-11 09:20 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-08-11 18:03 +0000
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-08-11 12:55 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-08-12 08:32 +0000
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-08-12 09:09 -0400
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-08-12 14:38 +0000
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-08-12 14:51 +0000
csiph-web