Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mit.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Lewis <simonlewis2001@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: verifying precedence
Date: Sun, 04 May 2014 13:23:54 +0200
Organization: Lewis
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <87a9axrdmd.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <ivc4m95b309smq7g0pkes96cfpmdfsmj6q@4ax.com> <AfOdnQTUOv31pf_OnZ2dnUVZ8tednZ2d@giganews.com> <ljtpkp$isn$1@dont-email.me> <1qwlhphwzsn5o.19fl7m2msrabe.dlg@40tude.net> <ljtqdt$oas$1@dont-email.me> <operators-20140501215811@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <ljugfi$32r$1@dont-email.me> <0IOdnRusKIWSkvvOnZ2dnUVZ8v-dnZ2d@bt.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: mit.eternal-september.org; posting-host="371458180cdfa72604cb64ff493b2306"; logging-data="30290"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX185dXj+sLcpwzLW/N287xDH9ofI2U9kO7Y="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:AM/hn3NrGWNi65Awwg6+SvDS75M= sha1:VsxlP0zFbHQGzLev5ZmSmEqIMdc=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:28361

"Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> writes:

> Joshua Cranmer ?? wrote:
>
>> It's like that with operator precedence: sure, there may not be all that
>> much to learn/memorize, but if you never use it, it's going to leave
>> your head as quickly as it came in.
>
> One difference here is that, in a natural language, unused forms die out or 
> acquire new meanings.  In a programming language (with current tech, anyway ;-) 
> that doesn't happen.
>
> So someone using an obscure form doesn't get a "huh?" from the compiler as 
> would happen with real speech.  The compiler is quite happy -- /it/ is an 
> expert in the language -- but the code may still not be fit for purpose.
>
> Hence the /recommendation/ to use brackets.  It could be seen as dumbing down, 
> it could be seen as "common sense".  Another way of seeing it is as 
> retroactively "fixing" a discovered flaw in the design of the language -- that 
> it has too many precedence levels (even if they aren't scambled).
>
>     -- chris 

For anyone wanting any maintainability then bracket it. It takes the
guessing out. I wouldn't dumb down the language use in terms of generics
etc but bracketing is a simple thing to so that removes any doubt.