Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #21144 > unrolled thread

java software naming question

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  java software naming question mcheung63@gmail.com - 2013-01-07 01:11 -0800
    Re: java software naming question "Aryeh M. Friedman" <Aryeh.Friedman@gmail.com> - 2013-01-07 01:21 -0800
    Re: java software naming question "Aryeh M. Friedman" <Aryeh.Friedman@gmail.com> - 2013-01-07 01:26 -0800
    Re: java software naming question Muco <muco@nomail.com> - 2013-01-07 20:38 +1100
      Re: java software naming question Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-07 11:12 -0800
    Re: java software naming question Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2013-01-07 07:03 -0800
      Re: java software naming question "Aryeh M. Friedman" <Aryeh.Friedman@gmail.com> - 2013-01-07 07:08 -0800
      Re: java software naming question Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-01-07 08:34 -0800
        Re: java software naming question Magnus Warker <magnus@mailinator.com> - 2013-01-07 18:26 +0100
          Re: java software naming question markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-01-07 10:54 -0800
            Re: java software naming question "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2013-01-07 19:41 +0000
              Re: java software naming question Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-01-07 17:13 -0500
                Re: java software naming question Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-01-07 18:44 -0800
                Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-07 19:37 -0800
          Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-07 19:33 -0800
            Re: java software naming question Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2013-01-08 09:39 +0000
              Re: java software naming question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-08 20:26 -0500
                Re: java software naming question Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2013-01-09 09:32 +0000
                  Re: java software naming question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-09 18:41 -0500
                    Re: java software naming question Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-09 16:23 -0800
                      Re: java software naming question Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2013-01-10 09:44 +0000
                        Re: java software naming question lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-01-10 10:16 +0000
                          Re: java software naming question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-12 17:07 -0500
                        Re: java software naming question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-12 17:03 -0500
    Re: java software naming question Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-07 11:11 -0800
      Re: java software naming question lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-01-07 19:48 +0000
      Re: java software naming question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-07 18:56 -0500
        Re: java software naming question Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-07 16:05 -0800
    Re: java software naming question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-07 18:55 -0500
    Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-07 18:04 -0800
      Re: java software naming question Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-07 18:33 -0800
        Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-07 19:57 -0800
          Re: java software naming question Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-01-07 20:11 -0800
          Re: java software naming question Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-01-07 23:05 -0600
            Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-09 09:40 -0800
              Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-09 11:18 -0800
                Re: java software naming question Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2013-01-09 11:59 -0800
                  Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-09 23:20 -0800
                    Re: java software naming question Stuart <DerTopper@web.de> - 2013-01-10 09:32 +0100
                Re: java software naming question Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-01-10 01:09 -0600
              Re: java software naming question Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-01-09 23:59 -0600
                Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-09 23:36 -0800
          Re: java software naming question Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-07 21:46 -0800
        Re: java software naming question Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-01-07 21:58 -0600
          Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-08 00:19 -0800
          Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-08 00:22 -0800
            Re: java software naming question "Aryeh M. Friedman" <Aryeh.Friedman@gmail.com> - 2013-01-08 00:30 -0800
              Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-09 09:41 -0800
              Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-09 10:51 -0800
                Re: java software naming question Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-01-09 23:27 -0600
            Re: java software naming question Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-08 07:07 -0800
              Re: java software naming question Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-01-08 09:31 -0600
                Re: java software naming question Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-08 07:36 -0800
            Re: java software naming question Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-01-08 08:47 -0800
              Re: java software naming question Stuart <DerTopper@web.de> - 2013-01-08 21:56 +0100
                Re: java software naming question Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-08 13:04 -0800
              Re: java software naming question Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2013-01-08 14:14 -0800
                Re: java software naming question Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-08 15:19 -0800
                Re: java software naming question Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-01-08 16:22 -0800
                Re: java software naming question Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2013-01-09 09:34 +0000
                Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-09 09:50 -0800
                  Re: java software naming question Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-01-09 10:10 -0800
                    Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-09 10:49 -0800
              Re: java software naming question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-08 20:37 -0500
          Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-08 00:26 -0800
            Re: java software naming question Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-08 07:12 -0800
              Re: java software naming question Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-01-08 09:27 -0600
                Re: java software naming question Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-08 07:32 -0800
                  Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-09 09:55 -0800
                    Re: java software naming question Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-09 12:53 -0800
                      Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-09 23:37 -0800
                Re: java software naming question Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-01-08 08:50 -0800
            Re: java software naming question Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-01-08 09:26 -0600
              Re: java software naming question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-09 09:59 -0800
                Re: java software naming question Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-01-09 23:31 -0600
      Re: java software naming question "Aryeh M. Friedman" <Aryeh.Friedman@gmail.com> - 2013-01-08 00:24 -0800
    Re: java software naming question johnjagu25@gmail.com - 2013-01-08 08:39 -0800

Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]

#21254

On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 14:14:31 -0800, Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org>
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

>Also, I distinctly remember being taught in school not to use "they" for
>gender-neutral singular.

Same here. We were taught to use "he" for singular unspecified gender.
I think "they" has the best chance. Many people use it "incorrectly"
already. It is already familiar. It already has almost the correct
meaning.  I started using it myself about a year ago. New words seem
too much of an affectation.  Misusing a word sneaks by.

Have you ever wondered why computer languages do not have pronouns,
unless you consider parameters a flavour of pronoun?

I invented pro-verbs in my Abundance language, roughly a callback.
-- 
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com
Students who hire or con others to do their homework are as foolish 
as couch potatoes who hire others to go to the gym for them. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21257

On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 09:50:11 -0800, Roedy Green
<see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:

[snip]

>Have you ever wondered why computer languages do not have pronouns,
>unless you consider parameters a flavour of pronoun?

     No.  "this" is a pronoun.

[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21258

On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 10:10:09 -0800, Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net>
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

> No.  "this" is a pronoun.
Forgot about that. There is a pronoun for this object but not for this
class.


In a way, import makes all Java variables into pronouns, in the sense
of abbreviations for full nouns.
-- 
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com
Students who hire or con others to do their homework are as foolish 
as couch potatoes who hire others to go to the gym for them. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21235

On 1/8/2013 11:47 AM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 00:22:41 -0800, Roedy Green
> <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>> Maybe we could borrow the new hen from Swedish.
>
>       "hen" being a female bird, we need a different word.

hen is somewhat the average of han og hun.

So the questions is what the average of he and she is? khe??

:-) :-) :-)

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21200

On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 21:58:17 -0600, Joshua Cranmer
<Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone
who said :

>hate sentences ending in prepositions

This is the kind of arrant pedantry I will not up with put!
~ Winston Churchill

To boldly go where no man has gone before.

I can't think of a better place to put an adverb to make it perfectly
clear which verb/adjective it is attached to.
-- 
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com
Students who hire or con others to do their homework are as foolish 
as couch potatoes who hire others to go to the gym for them. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21211

Roedy Green wrote:
> To boldly go where no man has gone before.
> 
> I can't think of a better place to put an adverb to make it perfectly
> clear which verb/adjective it is attached to.

Boldly to go where no man has gone before.
To go boldly where no man has gone before.

All are equally clear.

-- 
Lew

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21213

On 1/8/2013 9:12 AM, Lew wrote:
> Roedy Green wrote:
>> To boldly go where no man has gone before.
>>
>> I can't think of a better place to put an adverb to make it perfectly
>> clear which verb/adjective it is attached to.
>
> Boldly to go where no man has gone before.
> To go boldly where no man has gone before.
>
> All are equally clear.

Then how would you render this sentence without splitting an infinitive:
We expect profits to more than double this year.


-- 
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not 
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21215

Joshua Cranmer wrote:
> Lew wrote:
>> Roedy Green wrote:
>>> To boldly go where no man has gone before.
>>>
>>> I can't think of a better place to put an adverb to make it perfectly
>>> clear which verb/adjective it is attached to.
> 
>> Boldly to go where no man has gone before.
>> To go boldly where no man has gone before.
>>
>> All are equally clear.

Do you deny this assertion?

> Then how would you render this sentence without splitting an infinitive:
> We expect profits to more than double this year.

That infinitive is not split.

The verb is "more than double". 

-- 
Lew

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21255

On Tue, 8 Jan 2013 07:32:22 -0800 (PST), Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com>
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

>Do you deny this assertion?

That particular sentence does not have a problem, but if you scanned
my entire website you would find some split infinitives that I did
deliberately because the alternative was ambiguous or awkward.

My assertion is that splitting the infinitive is not ambiguous. I am
not asserting that not splitting the infinitive is always ambiguous,
just sometimes.

Avoiding split infinitives seems to me a silly rule.  I can't see any
advantage in it.

-- 
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com
Students who hire or con others to do their homework are as foolish 
as couch potatoes who hire others to go to the gym for them. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21269

Roedy Green wrote:
> Lew wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>>Do you deny this assertion?
> 
> That particular sentence does not have a problem, but if you scanned

That particular sentence was the one you yourself selected to illustrate the problem.

> my entire website you would find some split infinitives that I did
> deliberately because the alternative was ambiguous or awkward.
> 
> My assertion is that splitting the infinitive is not ambiguous. I am

I do not disagree.

> not asserting that not splitting the infinitive is always ambiguous,
> just sometimes.
> 
> Avoiding split infinitives seems to me a silly rule.  I can't see any

True.

> advantage in it.

The original advantage was that the rule made English more like Latin.

-- 
Lew

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21289

On Wed, 9 Jan 2013 12:53:01 -0800 (PST), Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com>
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

>
>That particular sentence was the one you yourself selected to illustrate the problem.

 I chose it because it is the most famous split infinitive.
-- 
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com
Students who hire or con others to do their homework are as foolish 
as couch potatoes who hire others to go to the gym for them. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21219

On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 09:27:46 -0600, Joshua Cranmer
<Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> wrote:

>On 1/8/2013 9:12 AM, Lew wrote:
>> Roedy Green wrote:
>>> To boldly go where no man has gone before.
>>>
>>> I can't think of a better place to put an adverb to make it perfectly
>>> clear which verb/adjective it is attached to.
>>
>> Boldly to go where no man has gone before.
>> To go boldly where no man has gone before.
>>
>> All are equally clear.

     HA!

     He said boldly to go where no man has gone before.
     He said to go boldly where no man has gone before.

     Different meanings.

>Then how would you render this sentence without splitting an infinitive:
>We expect profits to more than double this year.

     The rule against splitting infinitives comes from
prescriptionists who were trying to make English more Latin-like.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21212

On 1/8/2013 2:26 AM, Roedy Green wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 21:58:17 -0600, Joshua Cranmer
> <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone
> who said :
>
>> hate sentences ending in prepositions
>
> This is the kind of arrant pedantry I will not up with put!
> ~ Winston Churchill

It's "up with which I will not put", actually. This kind of phrasing is 
actually incorrect grammar (so people who would force you into that kind 
of situation are hypercorrective), since the verb is not "to put" but 
rather "to put up with", so "up" and "with" are actually particles and 
not prepositions.

Also, on a side note, I will point out that French requires you to make 
"quel" (which) agree with number and gender, whereas English does not.

-- 
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not 
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21256

On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 09:26:48 -0600, Joshua Cranmer
<Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone
who said :

>It's "up with which I will not put", actually. This kind of phrasing is 
>actually incorrect grammar (so people who would force you into that kind 
>of situation are hypercorrective),

I found it quoted many ways when I was preparing that post, but no
official source. Where did you get your version?
-- 
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com
Students who hire or con others to do their homework are as foolish 
as couch potatoes who hire others to go to the gym for them. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21282

On 1/9/2013 11:59 AM, Roedy Green wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 09:26:48 -0600, Joshua Cranmer
> <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone
> who said :
>
>> It's "up with which I will not put", actually. This kind of phrasing is
>> actually incorrect grammar (so people who would force you into that kind
>> of situation are hypercorrective),
>
> I found it quoted many ways when I was preparing that post, but no
> official source. Where did you get your version?

The original quote appears to be apocryphal, but that's the form that 
it's in a Wikipedia article about the subject, and I also distinctly 
recall seeing that exact phrasing in another article dealing with 
grammar fallacies (I think it was an Economist article?). Given that 
said phrasing is the only one I can work out that actually makes 
grammatical sense, I have a little more faith in it than the one you posted.

-- 
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not 
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21199

> English is obsessed with plurality/number.  You can't say anything
> 
> without being specific. It is similarly obsessed with gender.

This is as pointless as saying Java is obsessed with semicolons, ()/[]/{}, etc.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21217

s but content is a matter

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web