Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #34374
| From | Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: how does one explain this syntax? |
| Date | 2016-05-22 17:32 -0400 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <nht8b3$jr7$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <nhrhd5$7r6$1@reader1.panix.com> <nhs4gm$lre$1@dont-email.me> <nht4d5$kuu$2@reader1.panix.com> |
On 5/22/2016 4:21 PM, Popping mad wrote:
> On Sun, 22 May 2016 07:21:15 -0400, Eric Sosman wrote:
>
>> /* Display content using Iterator*/
>>> Set set = tmap.entrySet(); <<random obscure syntax... that is a
>>> constructor for another class?
>>
>> It's a method call.
>
> evidently it is a constructor
Evidently it is nothing of the kind. Do you see the `new' keyword
anywhere in the vicinity? Hmmm? How does one invoke a constructor if
not by using `new'?
> the question because why do I need two levels of class hierarchy manually
> called just to do a simple foreach.
First, it's not a class hierarchy. The code you presented
uses five classes (Details, TreeMap, Integer, String, and System)
and three interfaces (Set, Iterator, and Map.Entry), and none of
these is a sub-class or sub-interface of any of the others.
Second, the point of the example seems to have been to show
what happens under the covers of a "simple foreach." You could,
in fact, write a "simple foreach" to traverse the TreeMap's keys,
or values, or entries.
Third, "the question" as you pose it has nothing to do with
syntax.
Fourth and finally, it ill befits someone who doesn't know
Java, someone who doesn't know it even at an elementary level,
to bitch and moan about his own lack of knowledge.
--
esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid
"Don't be afraid of work. Make work afraid of you." -- TLM
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
how does one explain this syntax? ruben safir <ruben@mrbrklyn.com> - 2016-05-22 01:51 -0400
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-05-22 10:05 +0000
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-05-22 07:21 -0400
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Popping mad <rainbow@colition.gov> - 2016-05-22 20:21 +0000
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2016-05-22 22:32 +0200
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-05-22 17:32 -0400
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 14:36 -0700
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 14:34 -0700
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Knute Johnson <nospam@rabbitbrush.frazmtn.com> - 2016-05-22 08:41 -0700
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2016-05-22 22:22 +0200
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Knute Johnson <nospam@rabbitbrush.frazmtn.com> - 2016-05-22 22:13 -0700
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-05-23 07:32 -0400
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2016-05-23 04:57 -0700
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Popping mad <rainbow@colition.gov> - 2016-05-22 20:23 +0000
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Roedy Green <inquiry@mindprod.com> - 2016-05-30 21:51 -0700
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Roedy Green <inquiry@mindprod.com> - 2016-05-30 21:54 -0700
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Roedy Green <inquiry@mindprod.com> - 2016-05-30 22:00 -0700
Re: how does one explain this syntax? Roedy Green <inquiry@mindprod.com> - 2016-05-30 22:17 -0700
csiph-web