Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #16112 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Ramon F. Herrera" <ramon@conexus.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2012-07-19 13:09 -0700 |
| Last post | 2012-08-02 01:57 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 113 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer
Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? "Ramon F. Herrera" <ramon@conexus.net> - 2012-07-19 13:09 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2012-07-19 14:12 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Ivan The Not-So-Bad <1suf41n@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-19 21:47 +0000
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-19 18:00 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-07-19 14:35 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-19 17:58 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? David LaRue <huey.dll@gte.net> - 2012-07-19 22:22 +0000
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2012-07-19 17:41 -0500
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-07-19 23:29 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Fredrik Jonson <fredrik@jonson.org> - 2012-07-20 07:16 +0000
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-07-20 13:39 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-07-20 19:33 +0000
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-07-21 00:02 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-07-20 15:22 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-07-20 23:45 +0000
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-20 19:54 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-07-21 12:15 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-21 19:21 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-22 19:26 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-22 22:52 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-07-23 09:17 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-23 10:03 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? markspace <-@.> - 2012-07-23 10:51 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-23 11:42 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-07-23 21:11 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-23 13:53 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-23 21:00 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-23 18:48 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-24 15:44 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-24 13:47 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-07-24 14:18 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-24 14:38 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-24 18:36 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-24 16:32 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-24 20:20 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-25 10:10 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-25 13:58 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-25 13:38 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-25 18:42 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-07-25 06:44 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-25 10:14 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> - 2012-07-25 15:05 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-25 16:07 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-25 19:35 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-25 17:33 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-25 21:00 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-26 09:06 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-26 13:04 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-07-26 09:36 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-26 13:10 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-07-26 11:01 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-26 14:47 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2012-07-26 17:13 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-07-27 09:05 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-04 10:17 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-08-04 07:45 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-05 10:50 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-08-05 08:41 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-06 21:23 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-08-06 22:11 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-08-06 22:01 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-08-06 21:58 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-27 09:30 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-26 10:57 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-03 00:41 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-08-02 16:48 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-08-02 19:52 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-08-02 17:33 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-07-25 06:41 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-25 10:38 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-24 18:42 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-24 16:35 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-24 20:07 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? markspace <-@.> - 2012-07-24 17:36 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-25 10:22 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? markspace <-@.> - 2012-07-25 10:57 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-25 13:41 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? markspace <-@.> - 2012-07-25 13:44 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-25 14:34 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-25 18:46 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-25 16:10 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-30 14:59 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-30 19:55 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-02 23:41 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-08-02 18:31 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? markspace <-@.> - 2012-07-25 15:54 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-25 16:11 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-25 19:30 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-25 18:49 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-25 16:13 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-07-26 11:35 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-26 09:16 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-07-27 13:21 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-27 09:16 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-07-27 21:02 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-27 13:47 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? markspace <-@.> - 2012-07-27 13:51 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2012-07-27 17:11 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-07-28 18:36 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-07-28 13:50 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-29 15:24 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-23 19:46 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-07-23 18:49 -0700
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-23 22:59 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-23 19:40 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-20 19:51 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-21 19:16 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-07-21 19:49 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-23 03:28 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2012-07-20 03:03 -0500
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-07-20 19:46 -0400
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-21 18:59 +0200
Re: Do C++ and Java professionals use UML?? R kamalakkannan <kamalakkannan.ney@gmail.com> - 2012-08-02 01:57 -0700
Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-25 10:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <54a01892mkfhftospg8c8r9h24mn35arcj@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #16338 |
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 06:44:39 -0700, Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>> Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>
>>> Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>>> Lew wrote:
>>>>> Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>>>>> through the whole book, you get all of the content.
>>>>>
>>>>> So why don't you have the docs in hardcopy, then?
>>>>
>>>> How would I get them?
>>>
>>> Printer!
>>>
>>> :-)
>>
>> Is there something available other than n gazillion (OK, 20000)
>> Web pages?
>
>You're the one who said a book would be superior to the online version!
>
>You sure changed your tune in a hurry there, sport!
Not really. I have not looked for Java books before. It is not
enough that it be a book. It also has to be good. I have no
guarantee that there are any good ones. There may well be. For some
reason, there is not much for JavaScript with many having horrible
inaccuracies. The comp.lang.javascript FAQ lists two book with both
being considered flawed.
Lew, if you were trying to discourage people from using Java, I
can think of no better way than your harping. That sort of behaviour
by you and some others here is part of why I gave it up.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-25 15:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <250720121505132854%jimsgibson@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #16351 |
In article <54a01892mkfhftospg8c8r9h24mn35arcj@4ax.com>, Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 06:44:39 -0700, Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> wrote: > > >Gene Wirchenko wrote: > >> Is there something available other than n gazillion (OK, 20000) > >> Web pages? > > > >You're the one who said a book would be superior to the online version! > > > >You sure changed your tune in a hurry there, sport! > > Not really. I have not looked for Java books before. It is not > enough that it be a book. It also has to be good. I have no > guarantee that there are any good ones. There may well be. For some > reason, there is not much for JavaScript with many having horrible > inaccuracies. The comp.lang.javascript FAQ lists two book with both > being considered flawed. I use and recommend "Learning Java", by Niemeyer & Knudsen, O'Reilly, 3rd Ed., 2005. <http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9780596008734.do> The "Java In A Nutshell" and "Java Foundation Classes In A Nutshell" from the same publisher are also pretty good hard-copy references for the Java API. > > Lew, if you were trying to discourage people from using Java, I > can think of no better way than your harping. That sort of behaviour > by you and some others here is part of why I gave it up. It seems silly to fault a language because of the behavior of a few individuals on Usenet. -- Jim Gibson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-25 16:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dou0181vgath0ml1gkbdi1dlarihtpteis@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #16365 |
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:05:13 -0700, Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com>
wrote:
>In article <54a01892mkfhftospg8c8r9h24mn35arcj@4ax.com>, Gene Wirchenko
><genew@ocis.net> wrote:
[snip]
>> Lew, if you were trying to discourage people from using Java, I
>> can think of no better way than your harping. That sort of behaviour
>> by you and some others here is part of why I gave it up.
>
>It seems silly to fault a language because of the behavior of a few
>individuals on Usenet.
I had problems with the language. As we know (don't we?), every
language has its quirks. When I posted asking for help, I tended to
get nitpicker responses on points that were not relevant to the
problem. In one case, the replier criticised my variable-naming
convention and did not reply to the problem at all. It does not take
many of those to conclude that it is an unfriendly environment. If I
can not get help when I need it, it might be better to use another
language. I have not run into this behaviour in other language
newsgroups, at least, there is nowhere near the amount of backbiting
as can be here. What is it about Java and too many of its adherents?
There are some nice discussions about general issues which is why
I continue to follow this newsgroup.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-25 19:35 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <501082cb$0$281$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #16372 |
On 7/25/2012 7:07 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:05:13 -0700, Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> > wrote: >> In article <54a01892mkfhftospg8c8r9h24mn35arcj@4ax.com>, Gene Wirchenko >> <genew@ocis.net> wrote: > > [snip] > >>> Lew, if you were trying to discourage people from using Java, I >>> can think of no better way than your harping. That sort of behaviour >>> by you and some others here is part of why I gave it up. >> >> It seems silly to fault a language because of the behavior of a few >> individuals on Usenet. > > I had problems with the language. As we know (don't we?), every > language has its quirks. When I posted asking for help, I tended to > get nitpicker responses on points that were not relevant to the > problem. In one case, the replier criticised my variable-naming > convention and did not reply to the problem at all. It does not take > many of those to conclude that it is an unfriendly environment. By not following advice you indicated that you were not interested in learning Java. Very few want to waste time helping someone learn Java that are not interested in learning Java. > If I > can not get help when I need it, it might be better to use another > language. If you want to get the "the customer is always Right" treatment, then pay somebody. I strongly suspect that Lew will help you with all the problem no matter how you name your variables for 250 dollars an hour. If you want help for free on usenet you try to do your part. > I have not run into this behaviour in other language > newsgroups, at least, there is nowhere near the amount of backbiting > as can be here. The C# group is pretty similar. The C group was a lot more aggressive when I last followed it. What languages? Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-25 17:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <du31185c3mc2t5c8g5f5i1uac2miob6e4r@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #16377 |
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 19:35:38 -0400, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
wrote:
>On 7/25/2012 7:07 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
[snip]
>> I had problems with the language. As we know (don't we?), every
>> language has its quirks. When I posted asking for help, I tended to
>> get nitpicker responses on points that were not relevant to the
>> problem. In one case, the replier criticised my variable-naming
>> convention and did not reply to the problem at all. It does not take
>> many of those to conclude that it is an unfriendly environment.
>
>By not following advice you indicated that you were not
>interested in learning Java.
That is quite false and rather an arrogant conclusion.
I already have a multi-language style for indenting, variable
naming, etc. I see no reason to change it for Java. My questions
were not about formatting et al. Nonetheless, I was still interested
in learning Java.
[snip]
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-25 21:00 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <50109693$0$292$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #16379 |
On 7/25/2012 8:33 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 19:35:38 -0400, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> > wrote: > >> On 7/25/2012 7:07 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > > [snip] > >>> I had problems with the language. As we know (don't we?), every >>> language has its quirks. When I posted asking for help, I tended to >>> get nitpicker responses on points that were not relevant to the >>> problem. In one case, the replier criticised my variable-naming >>> convention and did not reply to the problem at all. It does not take >>> many of those to conclude that it is an unfriendly environment. >> >> By not following advice you indicated that you were not >> interested in learning Java. > > That is quite false and rather an arrogant conclusion. It seems rather well substantiated by your posts. > I already have a multi-language style for indenting, variable > naming, etc. I see no reason to change it for Java. Maybe not. But it is still a bad idea. And it indicates that you are not interested in doing things the Java way. So not very attractive to spend time on you problems. A lot more beneficial to spend time explaining to other readers how bad it so they have a chance of learning to do the right thing. > My questions > were not about formatting et al. Nonetheless, I was still interested > in learning Java. No. You were interested to learn the Wirchenko language that just happened to be compilable with a Java compiler because it has the same grammar. The interest in that language from other is very small. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-26 09:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dmq218plte1d3ivdrs78tgsscprb8ht1sa@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #16381 |
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 21:00:03 -0400, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
wrote:
[snip]
>And it indicates that you are not interested in doing things the Java way.
No, I am not interested in doing things your way. There are many
workable ways.
You can call your way the Java way if you wish, but that really
does not make it the only workable way.
[snip]
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-26 13:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <501178a4$0$295$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #16390 |
On 7/26/2012 12:06 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 21:00:03 -0400, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> > wrote: > > [snip] > >> And it indicates that you are not interested in doing things the Java way. > > No, I am not interested in doing things your way. If it was just my way there were no need to. But it is not my way - it is the way used in the Java world. > There are many > workable ways. > > You can call your way the Java way if you wish, but that really > does not make it the only workable way. Absolutely not. But it is the way that are relevant for Java programmers. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-26 09:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <xcmdnY0kn5-Z74zNnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #16381 |
On 7/25/2012 6:00 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: ... > You were interested to learn the Wirchenko language that just > happened to be compilable with a Java compiler because it has > the same grammar. The question of whether something is or is not Java seems to me to be one for which the JLS is indeed the ultimate authority. Can you point out in some way in which Gene's programs failed to conform to the JLS? Patricia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-26 13:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <501179ff$0$295$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #16392 |
On 7/26/2012 12:36 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > On 7/25/2012 6:00 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > ... >> You were interested to learn the Wirchenko language that just >> happened to be compilable with a Java compiler because it has >> the same grammar. > > The question of whether something is or is not Java seems to me to be > one for which the JLS is indeed the ultimate authority. Can you point > out in some way in which Gene's programs failed to conform to the JLS? If it did not conform to the JLS then hopefully the Java compiler would not compile it. But I assume that the question was rhetorical.You know what I mean, but disagree (which is fine). Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-26 11:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <zsOdneSrw9CZG4zNnZ2dnUVZ_sadnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #16395 |
On 7/26/2012 10:10 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 7/26/2012 12:36 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> On 7/25/2012 6:00 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> ... >>> You were interested to learn the Wirchenko language that just >>> happened to be compilable with a Java compiler because it has >>> the same grammar. >> >> The question of whether something is or is not Java seems to me to be >> one for which the JLS is indeed the ultimate authority. Can you point >> out in some way in which Gene's programs failed to conform to the JLS? > > If it did not conform to the JLS then hopefully the Java compiler would > not compile it. > > But I assume that the question was rhetorical.You know what I mean, but > disagree (which is fine). I'm not sure I know what you mean. Whether something is Java or not is a question of fact, and should be settled by reference to the JLS. It may be quite reasonable to decide that you are only willing to respond to questions from people who follow conventions you like, but I don't think it is reasonable to call something not Java because it does not follow those conventions. Patricia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-26 14:47 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <501190d4$0$291$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #16397 |
On 7/26/2012 2:01 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> On 7/26/2012 10:10 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 7/26/2012 12:36 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>>> On 7/25/2012 6:00 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> You were interested to learn the Wirchenko language that just
>>>> happened to be compilable with a Java compiler because it has
>>>> the same grammar.
>>>
>>> The question of whether something is or is not Java seems to me to be
>>> one for which the JLS is indeed the ultimate authority. Can you point
>>> out in some way in which Gene's programs failed to conform to the JLS?
>>
>> If it did not conform to the JLS then hopefully the Java compiler would
>> not compile it.
>>
>> But I assume that the question was rhetorical.You know what I mean, but
>> disagree (which is fine).
>
> I'm not sure I know what you mean. Whether something is Java or not is a
> question of fact, and should be settled by reference to the JLS.
>
> It may be quite reasonable to decide that you are only willing to
> respond to questions from people who follow conventions you like, but I
> don't think it is reasonable to call something not Java because it does
> not follow those conventions.
Whether some code is valid in the Java language and its semantics
are obviously defined by the JLS.
But Java comes with a baggage of history, philosophy,
traditions and lessons learned.
Java developers are not all identical.
If we look at some of the statements made in various threads:
- OOP is just overhead
- patterns are useless
- micro optimizations are good
- public fields are OK
- interfaces are useless
- I don't want to follow the standard naming convention
- I don't want to follow the standard formatting convention
- I don't want to use the Java library because my own is better
- portability is useless
- unit tests are useless
- ORM's are useless
- make is the right build tool for Java
- UML is useles
- Java docs are useless
etc.
then the archetype Java developer would not believe in any of them.
But many Java developers actually believe in a few of them, because
people are different with different personal experiences and working
in different domains. And best practices are not an exact science.
Someone believing in most of them is a different story. I am skeptical
about calling such a person for a Java developer. Even though the code
is following JLS and compiles with javac, then there is almost no
overlap with the Java world. It is not the Java way. And if the
person tried to write such code at work, then the person would be
kicked out quickly in many places. It is not what companies expect
when they hire a Java developer.
People are not born with knowledge about good Java practices. They
learn them along the way.
I find it natural that people posting problems in cljp are violating
some common best practices in Java. If they knew everything then they
would probably not have a problem to post.
I am all for helping them with their problem. And also guiding them
towards better practices. I do that as well. I don't think I am among
the most rigorous in that regard though.
If people notice the well meant suggestions and over time adjust,
then I am happy.
If they chose to ignore the good advice, then I am disappointed but
not surprised. That is how it is. I don't maintain a black list so
I will most likely try and help them again - and get disappointed again.
But I know that is how it is. C'est la vie. And having to maintain
the code they end up with is a severe punishment in itself!
But there are a few things that get me in flame mode:
1) Complaints from posters that they just want their miserable
code fixed without any good advice. That is what one can request
for 250 dollars an hour. If one want free advice, then one has
to accept the full package of advice.
2) Attempts to recommend the bad practices to other. Either explicit
or implicit by criticizing when somebody points out the problems
in some code.
Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-26 17:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <jusbtg$bfs$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16398 |
On 26/07/2012 2:47 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > > Whether some code is valid in the Java language and its semantics > are obviously defined by the JLS. > > But Java comes with a baggage of history, philosophy, > traditions and lessons learned. In support of Arne: I know a programming language semanticist (whom one might think was only interested in formalizable stuff) say that languages also had "pragmatics", which include all the sorts of things Arne listed. I think one could use the word "culture" too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-07-27 09:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <EvSdnXhPjOT-IY_NnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #16398 |
On 7/26/2012 11:47 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: ... > Someone believing in most of them is a different story. I am skeptical > about calling such a person for a Java developer. Even though the code > is following JLS and compiles with javac, then there is almost no > overlap with the Java world. It is not the Java way. And if the > person tried to write such code at work, then the person would be > kicked out quickly in many places. It is not what companies expect > when they hire a Java developer. ... I think of programming languages as tools, not philosophies. Java happens to be a favorite tool, one that fits my brain the way my favorite wood carving chisel fits my hand. On the other hand, I no more subscribe to "the Java way" than to a "the half inch chisel way". When I'm starting a new program, in a situation in which I'm free to use any standards I like, I follow the commonest conventions for the program's language. If I'm modifying or adding to an existing project, or working in an organization that has other conventions, I follow the local conventions. Patricia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-04 10:17 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.2a85231bdcffe960989731@202.177.16.121> |
| In reply to | #16408 |
In article <EvSdnXhPjOT-IY_NnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, pats@acm.org says... > I think of programming languages as tools, not philosophies. You can use a excavator to dig a hole and you could use your old hand shovel, but you would not try to grab and move the excavator's arm with our hands to dig a hole, just because that's the way you operated your old hand shovel for the past 10 years, and you're used to that. Both are different tools that use the same method (digging) to do the same job (creating a hole), but they want to be used the way their inventors have imagined, not the way you have used another tool previously. It may still work though, but I doubt it's the brightest idea. Kind regards, Wanja -- ..Alesi's problem was that the back of the car was jumping up and down dangerously - and I can assure you from having been teammate to Jean Alesi and knowing what kind of cars that he can pull up with, when Jean Alesi says that a car is dangerous - it is. [Jonathan Palmer] --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to news@netfront.net ---
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-04 07:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <i8-dnR2vnZbqqIDNnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #17110 |
On 8/4/2012 1:17 AM, Wanja Gayk wrote: > In article <EvSdnXhPjOT-IY_NnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, > pats@acm.org says... > >> I think of programming languages as tools, not philosophies. > > You can use a excavator to dig a hole and you could use your old hand > shovel, but you would not try to grab and move the excavator's arm with > our hands to dig a hole, just because that's the way you operated your > old hand shovel for the past 10 years, and you're used to that. > > Both are different tools that use the same method (digging) to do the > same job (creating a hole), but they want to be used the way their > inventors have imagined, not the way you have used another tool > previously. It may still work though, but I doubt it's the brightest > idea. There are indeed some things that are really necessary for effective use of a given tool. I put the sharp end of my chisel against the wood, and tap the blunt end with a mallet. I'm sure everyone using a wood chisel and a mallet does that the same way round. The analogy for the situation that started this sub-thread is as though the excavator were delivered with green paint, and most excavators of that model were painted green. A particular user has a lot of hole-related tools such as pile drivers and other models of excavators, and choose to paint all of them blue to avoid the inconvenience of keeping different paint colors around. He asked a question about lubricating the excavator, but some people take one look at a photo of his blue excavator and tell him that it should be green, that he will never be a capable excavator user unless he paints it green, and that green paint is the excavator way. Patricia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-05 10:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nospam-30866A.10503505082012@news.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #17115 |
In article <i8-dnR2vnZbqqIDNnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> wrote: > On 8/4/2012 1:17 AM, Wanja Gayk wrote: > > In article <EvSdnXhPjOT-IY_NnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, > > pats@acm.org says... > > > >> I think of programming languages as tools, not philosophies. > > > > You can use a excavator to dig a hole and you could use your old > > hand shovel, but you would not try to grab and move the excavator's > > arm with our hands to dig a hole, just because that's the way you > > operated your old hand shovel for the past 10 years, and you're > > used to that. > > > > Both are different tools that use the same method (digging) to do > > the same job (creating a hole), but they want to be used the way > > their inventors have imagined, not the way you have used another > > tool previously. It may still work though, but I doubt it's the > > brightest idea. > > There are indeed some things that are really necessary for effective > use of a given tool. I put the sharp end of my chisel against the > wood, and tap the blunt end with a mallet. I'm sure everyone using a > wood chisel and a mallet does that the same way round. One sharp on both ends might be widely rejected as dangerous; one blunt on both ends might be an unfamiliar style of draw knife. I see no harm in polite explication in either case. > The analogy for the situation that started this sub-thread is as > though the excavator were delivered with green paint, and most > excavators of that model were painted green. A particular user has a > lot of hole-related tools such as pile drivers and other models of > excavators, and choose to paint all of them blue to avoid the > inconvenience of keeping different paint colors around. > > He asked a question about lubricating the excavator, but some people > take one look at a photo of his blue excavator and tell him that it > should be green, that he will never be a capable excavator user > unless he paints it green, and that green paint is the excavator way. A medical supply vendor asks for help marketing a new line of compressed nitrous oxide. Instead of the familiar blue, the tanks are green, "nitrous" is almost illegible, and "oxide" is misspelled in a particularly unfortunate way. No one comments. An errant bottle finds its way to a matching green oxygen manifold; hapless victims enter a persistent vegetative state. Misery ensues. As a practical matter, most stylistic vagaries fall between these consequential extremes. I would encourage posters to welcome related answers, both those that cite a problem and those that comment on its relative importance. -- John B. Matthews trashgod at gmail dot com <http://sites.google.com/site/drjohnbmatthews>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-05 08:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <R9udnfv4C4qtCYPNnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #17211 |
On 8/5/2012 7:50 AM, John B. Matthews wrote: > In article <i8-dnR2vnZbqqIDNnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@earthlink.com>, > Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> wrote: > >> On 8/4/2012 1:17 AM, Wanja Gayk wrote: >>> In article <EvSdnXhPjOT-IY_NnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, >>> pats@acm.org says... >>> >>>> I think of programming languages as tools, not philosophies. >>> >>> You can use a excavator to dig a hole and you could use your old >>> hand shovel, but you would not try to grab and move the excavator's >>> arm with our hands to dig a hole, just because that's the way you >>> operated your old hand shovel for the past 10 years, and you're >>> used to that. >>> >>> Both are different tools that use the same method (digging) to do >>> the same job (creating a hole), but they want to be used the way >>> their inventors have imagined, not the way you have used another >>> tool previously. It may still work though, but I doubt it's the >>> brightest idea. >> >> There are indeed some things that are really necessary for effective >> use of a given tool. I put the sharp end of my chisel against the >> wood, and tap the blunt end with a mallet. I'm sure everyone using a >> wood chisel and a mallet does that the same way round. > > One sharp on both ends might be widely rejected as dangerous; one blunt > on both ends might be an unfamiliar style of draw knife. I see no harm > in polite explication in either case. > >> The analogy for the situation that started this sub-thread is as >> though the excavator were delivered with green paint, and most >> excavators of that model were painted green. A particular user has a >> lot of hole-related tools such as pile drivers and other models of >> excavators, and choose to paint all of them blue to avoid the >> inconvenience of keeping different paint colors around. >> >> He asked a question about lubricating the excavator, but some people >> take one look at a photo of his blue excavator and tell him that it >> should be green, that he will never be a capable excavator user >> unless he paints it green, and that green paint is the excavator way. > > A medical supply vendor asks for help marketing a new line of compressed > nitrous oxide. Instead of the familiar blue, the tanks are green, > "nitrous" is almost illegible, and "oxide" is misspelled in a > particularly unfortunate way. No one comments. An errant bottle finds > its way to a matching green oxygen manifold; hapless victims enter a > persistent vegetative state. Misery ensues. This seems like a good argument in support of sticking to one style, regardless of brand. The programming equivalent is using one set of conventions for indentation and identifier construction regardless of programming language. That way, there is less risk of someone misreading an identifier because it is in a different style from code in another language they have been using. Patricia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-06 21:23 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nospam-C4B45D.21230006082012@news.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #17212 |
In article <R9udnfv4C4qtCYPNnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d@earthlink.com>, Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> wrote: [...] > >> There are indeed some things that are really necessary for > >> effective use of a given tool. I put the sharp end of my chisel > >> against the wood, and tap the blunt end with a mallet. I'm sure > >> everyone using a wood chisel and a mallet does that the same way > >> round. > > > > One sharp on both ends might be widely rejected as dangerous; one > > blunt on both ends might be an unfamiliar style of draw knife. I > > see no harm in polite explication in either case. > > > >> The analogy for the situation that started this sub-thread is as > >> though the excavator were delivered with green paint, and most > >> excavators of that model were painted green. A particular user has > >> a lot of hole-related tools such as pile drivers and other models > >> of excavators, and choose to paint all of them blue to avoid the > >> inconvenience of keeping different paint colors around. > >> > >> He asked a question about lubricating the excavator, but some > >> people take one look at a photo of his blue excavator and tell him > >> that it should be green, that he will never be a capable excavator > >> user unless he paints it green, and that green paint is the > >> excavator way. > > > > A medical supply vendor asks for help marketing a new line of > > compressed nitrous oxide. Instead of the familiar blue, the tanks > > are green, "nitrous" is almost illegible, and "oxide" is misspelled > > in a particularly unfortunate way. No one comments. An errant > > bottle finds its way to a matching green oxygen manifold; hapless > > victims enter a persistent vegetative state. Misery ensues. > > This seems like a good argument in support of sticking to one style, > regardless of brand. The programming equivalent is using one set of > conventions for indentation and identifier construction regardless of > programming language. That way, there is less risk of someone > misreading an identifier because it is in a different style from code > in another language they have been using. Sorry, the best I can muster is a few variations per language. I've grown too dependent on perceptual cues that help me change gear into whatever language I face. This may be an artifact of having worked largely in code bases that already followed established, widely used guidelines. -- John B. Matthews trashgod at gmail dot com <http://sites.google.com/site/drjohnbmatthews>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-06 22:11 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <50207949$0$290$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #17212 |
On 8/5/2012 11:41 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > On 8/5/2012 7:50 AM, John B. Matthews wrote: >> In article <i8-dnR2vnZbqqIDNnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@earthlink.com>, >> Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> wrote: >> >>> On 8/4/2012 1:17 AM, Wanja Gayk wrote: >>>> In article <EvSdnXhPjOT-IY_NnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, >>>> pats@acm.org says... >>>> >>>>> I think of programming languages as tools, not philosophies. >>>> >>>> You can use a excavator to dig a hole and you could use your old >>>> hand shovel, but you would not try to grab and move the excavator's >>>> arm with our hands to dig a hole, just because that's the way you >>>> operated your old hand shovel for the past 10 years, and you're >>>> used to that. >>>> >>>> Both are different tools that use the same method (digging) to do >>>> the same job (creating a hole), but they want to be used the way >>>> their inventors have imagined, not the way you have used another >>>> tool previously. It may still work though, but I doubt it's the >>>> brightest idea. >>> >>> There are indeed some things that are really necessary for effective >>> use of a given tool. I put the sharp end of my chisel against the >>> wood, and tap the blunt end with a mallet. I'm sure everyone using a >>> wood chisel and a mallet does that the same way round. >> >> One sharp on both ends might be widely rejected as dangerous; one blunt >> on both ends might be an unfamiliar style of draw knife. I see no harm >> in polite explication in either case. >> >>> The analogy for the situation that started this sub-thread is as >>> though the excavator were delivered with green paint, and most >>> excavators of that model were painted green. A particular user has a >>> lot of hole-related tools such as pile drivers and other models of >>> excavators, and choose to paint all of them blue to avoid the >>> inconvenience of keeping different paint colors around. >>> >>> He asked a question about lubricating the excavator, but some people >>> take one look at a photo of his blue excavator and tell him that it >>> should be green, that he will never be a capable excavator user >>> unless he paints it green, and that green paint is the excavator way. >> >> A medical supply vendor asks for help marketing a new line of compressed >> nitrous oxide. Instead of the familiar blue, the tanks are green, >> "nitrous" is almost illegible, and "oxide" is misspelled in a >> particularly unfortunate way. No one comments. An errant bottle finds >> its way to a matching green oxygen manifold; hapless victims enter a >> persistent vegetative state. Misery ensues. > > This seems like a good argument in support of sticking to one style, > regardless of brand. The programming equivalent is using one set of > conventions for indentation and identifier construction regardless of > programming language. That way, there is less risk of someone misreading > an identifier because it is in a different style from code in another > language they have been using. I think same brand for programming languages is SUN Java and IBM Java for Java, GCC and MSVC++ for C/C++ etc.. And it certainly makes sense to use the same conventions no matter what vendor provides the compiler. Different languages must be more like different type of bottles: medical supply, beverages, poisons. And they do not use same color convention. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer
csiph-web