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


Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #34474

Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling?

From Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Newsgroups comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling?
Date 2016-06-04 18:44 -0400
Organization Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID <nivlkk$1mm2$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References <Gosling-20160604185910@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <niva2t$13sk$1@gioia.aioe.org> <nivehs$9e0$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw


On 6/4/2016 4:43 PM, Eric Sosman wrote:
> On 6/4/2016 3:27 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> I do not remember ever to have written a class with a constructor
>> with a single argument of same type.
>
>     I've done it, but not very often.  Usually it's when the class is
> mutable (for what seem to be good reasons) but I need an instance that
> won't be mutated:

>> And the only example that I can remember having seen
>> is java.lang.String. And usage of that is usually a code
>> smell.
>
>     Well, the JavaDoc suggests that any class implementing Collection
> ought to provide a constructor that takes a Collection argument.  So
> we could *almost* say that ArrayList has a constructor that takes a
> (slightly disguised) ArrayList as its argument.  Similar remarks apply
> to Map.

:-)

>     FWIW, Joshua Bloch appears to disagree with Gosling et al.  From
> "Effective Java:"
>
>     Is all this complexity [of implementing Cloneable] really
>     necessary?  Rarely.  [...]  <b>you are probably better off
>     providing some other means of object copying or simply not
>     providing the capability.</b> [emphasis his]
>
>     <b>A fine approach to object copying is to provide a <i>copy
>     constructor</i>. [...]</b> [emphasis and italics his]
>
>     The copy constructor approach and its static factory variant
>     have many advantages over Cloneable/clone [...]
>
>     So: Who ya gonna trust?  The guy who thought unsigned integers
> were "too complex" or the guy who invented collections?

But that is a slightly different discussion.

Q1: Does Java mostly use Cloneable instead of copy constructor?

A1: Unless we count your *almost* copy constructor then I would
say YES as an observable fact.

Q2: Should Java use use Cloneable or copy constructor?

A2: <this can be argued>

Arne

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-06-04 15:27 -0400
  Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:43 -0400
    Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-06-04 18:44 -0400
      Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-06-05 08:05 -0400
        Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-06-05 08:31 -0400
        Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 05:22 -0700
          Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-06-06 09:00 -0400
            Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? v_borchert@despammed.com (Volker Borchert) - 2016-06-06 16:06 +0000
              Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2016-06-06 22:56 +0200
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 05:08 -0700
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-06-07 08:41 -0400
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-07 13:14 +0000
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 06:30 -0700
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2016-06-07 19:10 +0200
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 10:22 -0700
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Mike Amling <mamling@chaff.us> - 2016-06-07 15:31 -0500
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 06:31 -0700
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-06-08 10:41 -0400
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 10:21 -0700
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-06-08 14:10 -0400
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2016-06-08 20:54 +0200
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-06-08 16:36 -0400
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2016-06-08 23:11 +0200
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2016-06-10 12:20 -0700
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2016-06-14 19:10 +0200
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-06-07 17:12 -0400
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2016-06-07 23:25 +0200
                Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-06-07 17:33 -0400
          Re: Are you sure, Mr. Gosling? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-06-06 21:18 -0400

csiph-web