Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #24804
| From | Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Interface with implied Constructor |
| References | (4 earlier) <Qo1Gt.8876$2C2.1824@fx04.iad> <n45ju8laf3gcaqtlerq776rti1jtid53j9@4ax.com> <1KhGt.130731$7o1.74691@fx17.iad> <852ru8909m1p1eqcnhpotjpbmv1dd5hmui@4ax.com> <ksk2nh$dpj$1@dont-email.me> |
| Message-ID | <ZahHt.8828$Sn2.7508@fx19.iad> (permalink) |
| Organization | Public Usenet Newsgroup Access |
| Date | 2013-07-22 18:08 -0300 |
On 07/22/2013 05:02 PM, Eric Sosman wrote: > On 7/22/2013 3:39 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: >> [...] I just want a prototype of the >> constructor with the rest of the prototypes. > > I don't think anyone's in doubt about what you and Richard > want. The question that still burns is: > > "Why?" > > Perhaps if you'd offer a concrete example...? To avoid charges > of made-up-ness, take an existing interface that you think would be > more useful if it could specify constructors, and exhibit the > constructors you'd like it to specify. Please use an interface > that's not some creature of your own; if the idea is useful, there > surely must be some java or javax interfaces that could use it. > (If there aren't, that casts some doubt on the utility of the > construct ...) > > Then, maybe, we can get away from this childish "It's behavior!" > "No, it's implementation!" back-and-forth. A use case, please. > I agree with you in wanting to see an example that we can discuss. Not so sure the "back-and-forth" is totally childish, although it's close to being exhausted. I think it comes down to how one defines object behaviour. One prevalent definition is that object behaviour is defined by all the methods that can be applied to it, so including accessors even. I would not myself include constructors under this definition, even though they resemble instance methods, because you only have a valid instance when you leave the constructor. And yet there are different types of object behaviour. I generally distinguish between methods that could sensibly be in an interface, and those that smack a bit too much of implementation. First category might be translate2D(Double direction, Double distance) and second might be set2DPositionXY(Double x, Double y) Granted, this is fuzzy, but I think there's some validity to the "would this method ring true in an interface" test. AHS -- When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him. -- Jonathan Swift
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Interface with implied Constructor Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-07-09 18:41 +0800
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-07-09 04:08 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-07-10 06:46 +0800
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-07-09 21:08 -0400
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2013-07-11 19:11 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-07-14 17:53 +0200
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2013-07-15 08:58 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-07-15 10:57 -0700
[OT] Re: Interface with implied Constructor Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-07-15 14:13 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Interface with implied Constructor Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-07-15 12:58 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-07-15 20:45 +0200
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-07-14 18:03 +0200
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-07-18 23:21 -0300
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-07-19 12:38 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-07-19 17:56 -0300
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-07-22 12:39 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-07-22 16:02 -0400
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-07-22 18:08 -0300
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-07-23 14:32 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> - 2013-07-23 14:43 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-07-24 13:27 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-07-24 18:20 -0300
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-07-26 00:03 +0200
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-07-24 21:18 +0000
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-07-24 17:42 -0400
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-07-23 18:19 -0400
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-07-24 13:31 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-07-27 04:06 +0100
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-07-19 21:21 +0000
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-07-19 18:56 -0300
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-07-19 18:10 -0400
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-07-19 20:46 -0300
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-07-20 12:42 +0800
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-07-20 09:08 -0300
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-07-20 09:08 -0400
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2013-07-19 19:20 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-07-19 20:11 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-07-20 12:26 +0800
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-07-20 09:38 -0300
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-07-20 19:46 +0200
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-07-20 19:12 +0000
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-07-20 17:12 -0400
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-07-20 21:18 +0000
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-07-21 12:13 +0200
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-07-21 16:18 -0300
Re: Interface with implied Constructor markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-07-21 13:45 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-07-21 16:58 -0400
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-07-21 21:19 -0300
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-07-20 20:09 +0200
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-07-20 20:21 +0200
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-07-20 23:17 +0200
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-07-20 17:32 -0400
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-07-21 00:10 +0200
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-07-21 17:53 -0300
Re: Interface with implied Constructor markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-07-09 18:13 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-07-10 18:03 +0800
Re: Interface with implied Constructor markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-07-10 08:41 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-07-11 06:53 +0800
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-07-09 21:41 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-07-10 17:55 +0800
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-07-10 14:52 -0700
Re: Interface with implied Constructor Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-07-10 16:02 -0700
csiph-web