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

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #16543 > unrolled thread

The Point where the FNVW is asked about eligibility for a GAB award <Re

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

Contents

  The Point where the FNVW is asked about eligibility for a GAB award <Re "This account has been banned becaus" <this.account.has.been.banned.becaus@1:261/38.remove-5bm-this> - 2012-07-29 18:16 +0000
    Re: The Point where the FNVW is asked about eligibility for a GAB "Nadegda" <nadegda@1:261/38.remove-5bm-this> - 2012-07-29 18:16 +0000
      Re: The Point where the FNVW is asked about eligibility for a GAB award "This account has been banned becaus" <this.account.has.been.banned.becaus@1:261/38.remove-5bm-this> - 2012-07-29 18:16 +0000
        Re: The Point where the FNVW is asked about eligibility for a GAB "Nadegda" <nadegda@1:261/38.remove-5bm-this> - 2012-07-29 18:16 +0000
      Re: The Point where the FNVW is asked about eligibility for a GAB Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2012-07-30 00:42 +0000

#16543 — The Point where the FNVW is asked about eligibility for a GAB award <Re

From: This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms
Of Use <laughing@u.kook>

NNTP-Posting-Host: 74.14.135.55


On  Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:10:23 GMT, Captain Koloth Derbyshite
<koloth17@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Nov 30, 10:29 am, Lew <no...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>> Captain Koloth wrote:
>> > That IS the contract.
>>
>> Only half of it.
>
> Nearly all of it, given it's rarely custom-subclasses.
>
>> People who write code are just as important as those who use it.
>
> That does not make sense. Both clients and subclassers are "people who
> write code".
>
>> >> But the contract also exists for the SortedMap implementer, and it
>> >> defines what he's allowed to do. If i wrote a SortedMap under 1.4
>> >> that returned a key set that wasn't a SortedSet, which was perfectly
>> >> legal at that point, i would take a very dim view of a change to the
>> >> definitionof SortedMap in 1.5 that made it illegal.
>>
>> > Why? It would be very easy to update it, since the backing Map is
>>
>> But you thus show that you realize that there would be a need for
>> change if the contract changed.
>
> Qagh Sopbe'.

Huh?

> Entirely beside the point, given how little change.

>> And you don't know how easy it would be to update it,
>> since the implementation to change will itself be used by other code,
>> which then will need to change
>
> QoH! It won't, since changing the implementation keySet return type to
> SortedSet won't force change on clients of that code, and it's
> unlikely for the implementation to be itself subclassed, and even more
> unlikely for such a subclass to be overriding the superclass
> implementation of keySet.
>
>> thus requiring unit tests, regression tests,
>> deployment to a zillion production sites, possible new bugs to fix,
>> delays to other more critical feature improvements or repair, and a
>> whole lot of cost to Java projects overall.
>

> Tojo'Qa'!

Huh?

> What a ridiculous slippery slope argument.
>
>> > sorted. You'd just need to implement first, last, subSet, tailSet, and
>> > headSet, and you could make all of those (in presumably an anonymous
>> > inner class of your map) punt to MySortedMap.this.firstKey(), lastKey
>> > (), subMap(x,y).keySet(), tailMap(x).keySet(), and headMap(y).keySet
>> > ().
>>
>> > It would take all of five minutes.
>>
>> [calls me a liar]
>
> Grrr! TlhIngan quv DatIchDI' Seng yIghuH!

Paula, are you off your meds?

> If anyone here is a lying petaQ ... well, let's just say that it is
> not I!
>
>> > Also, how common are third-party implementations of SortedMap,
>> > really?
>>
>> At the time the contract was written, there weren't any.  Having
>> written the contract, Java must not assume that continues to pertain.
>>  There could be thousands of such implementations by now.
>
> VeQ! There are probably only a handful, if that.

This doesn't look like you're winning at all, for fuck's sake.

(FNVW, is it possible to nominate Paul "Two Socks" Derbyshire for the Goofy 
Azzed Babboon for this very old post?)


--
If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's Aratzio frogeries,
                   check out Scatboi's forgeries.
"It's not paranoia when it's careful analysis of a trail of forensic
           evidence gathered from post headers, fuckwit." - writes
   Feerless Forensic Usenet Investigator, Nadless the Derbyshite sock.
Then Nadless The Kook presents his 'forensic evidence' of 'outright forgery':
<ju2hm1$r7a$1@dont-email.me> = From: Nadegda <nad318b404@gmale.invalid>
<ju55oa$9h3$2@dont-email.me> = From: Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid>

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Dada-1
 * Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)
--- Synchronet 3.16a-Win32 NewsLink 1.98
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#16544 — Re: The Point where the FNVW is asked about eligibility for a GAB

  To: This account has been banned becaus
From: Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid>

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 08:03:37 +0000, This account has been banned because it 
violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use wrote:

[silent followup-to denied. And why are you crossposting your kookfeud with 
"Derbyshire" to comp.lang.java.programmer, kooky?]

> NNTP-Posting-Host: 74.14.135.55
>
>
> On  Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:10:23 GMT, Captain Koloth Derbyshite
> <koloth17@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
> (FNVW, is it possible to nominate Paul "Two Socks" Derbyshire for the
> Goofy Azzed Babboon for this very old post?)

*You* cannot nominate anyone for anything, Offishul AUK Spankling.

Furthermore, I am assuming you mutated that attribution line in your usual 
manner and it actually only said "Captain Koloth" or similar. If so, the new 
rules forbid real-lifing the guy unless he's an outerfilther himself.

Lastly, there's no evidence the name you stated is the name of the poster that 
wrote that old article anyway.

P.S. You are obviously a complete nincompoop when it comes to Star Trek. The 
poster of that old article was obviously acting the part of a Klingon, for 
whatever reason. Where was it, in a Star Trek group? (Since you didn't post a 
message-ID, did alter the attribution line, and didn't specify the group, I 
can't find it.)

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Dada-1
 * Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)
--- Synchronet 3.16a-Win32 NewsLink 1.98
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

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

#16547 — Re: The Point where the FNVW is asked about eligibility for a GAB award

  To: Nadegda
From: This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms
Of Use <laughing@u.kook>

Paul G. Derbyshire <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> wrote:

> On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 08:03:37 +0000, This account has been banned because
> it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use wrote:
>
> [silent followup-to denied

Restored; you've already stunk up that group enough, Paul Derbyshire.

> And why are you crossposting your kookfeud
> with "Derbyshire" to comp.lang.java.programmer<SLAP>

Paul G. Derbyshite, stop speaking about yourself in the third person.


>> NNTP-Posting-Host: 74.14.135.55
>>
>>
>> On  Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:10:23 GMT, Captain Koloth Derbyshite
>> <koloth17@gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>> (FNVW, is it possible to nominate Paul "Two Socks" Derbyshire for the
>> Goofy Azzed Babboon for this very old post?)
>
> *You*<SLAP>

Shut up, Paul Derbyshite; you are not the FNVW.



--
If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's Aratzio frogeries,
                   check out Scatboi's forgeries.
"It's not paranoia when it's careful analysis of a trail of forensic
           evidence gathered from post headers, fuckwit." - writes
   Feerless Forensic Usenet Investigator, Nadless the Derbyshite sock.
Then Nadless The Kook presents his 'forensic evidence' of 'outright forgery':
<ju2hm1$r7a$1@dont-email.me> = From: Nadegda <nad318b404@gmale.invalid>
<ju55oa$9h3$2@dont-email.me> = From: Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid>

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Dada-1
 * Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)
--- Synchronet 3.16a-Win32 NewsLink 1.98
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

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

#16548 — Re: The Point where the FNVW is asked about eligibility for a GAB

  To: This account has been banned becaus
From: Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid>

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 08:35:29 +0000, This account has been banned because it 
violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use wrote:

[silent followup-to denied]

>> [silent followup-to denied
>
> Restored; you've already stunk up that group enough<SLAP!>

YOU started your latest kooky feud-thread with a post that YOU chose to 
crosspost, irrelevantly, to that group, instead of choosing to post it only to 
alt.usenet.kooks, kook.

>> And why are you crossposting your kookfeud with "Derbyshire" to
>> comp.lang.java.programmer<SLAP>
>
> Paul G. Derbyshite, stop speaking about yourself in the third person.

Delusion noted, kook.

>> *You* cannot nominate anyone for anything, Offishul AUK Spankling.
>
> Shut up, Paul Derbyshite; you are not the FNVW.

No, he isn't -- whoever he is. But I *am* an FNVW (two of three), and, 
regardless, as a deemed kook you cannot nominate.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Dada-1
 * Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)
--- Synchronet 3.16a-Win32 NewsLink 1.98
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

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

#16596 — Re: The Point where the FNVW is asked about eligibility for a GAB

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 18:16:46 GMT,
Nadegda <nadegda@1:261/38.remove-5bm-this> wrote:

[snip froggery]

Wrong.

Not the XanaNews frogger/forger this time, and doesn't look like 
Stalemate or Morphy either. Posted through a server I've never heard of 
before, too.

OK, which twit is frogging me this time? And why are you bothering 
comp.lang.java.programmer, AGAIN, with this silly feud? Based on that 
fact alone I'm guessing Account Banned as the likely culprit, but lack 
proof (and, unlike a kook, freely admit that I lack proof).

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web