Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #34928

Re: void

Path	csiph.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject	Re: void
Date	Sat, 16 Jul 2016 18:34:30 -0400
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines	38
Message-ID	<nmecpm$1uao$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	<void-20160716231330@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host	7SK6yTFfqwlIPNBLl3l7Qg.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	8bit
X-Complaints-To	abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
X-Notice	Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:34928

Show key headers only | View raw

On 7/16/2016 6:20 PM, Stefan Ram wrote:
>   On several occassions I have observed that the compiler, javac,
>   has it's own vocabulary. For example, it uses words like »context«
>   or »symbol« that might not be used this way in the JLS.
>
>   Another example I encountered today:
>
>   The JLS does not seem to think of »void« as a »type«. It says:
>
> 8.4.5 Method Result
>
> The result of a method declaration either declares the type of
> value that the method returns (the return type), or uses the
> keyword void to indicate that the method does not return a value.
>
>   (end of quotation).
>
>   But for the compiler, it seems to be a »type«:
>
> Main.java:3: error: 'void' type not allowed here
> java.lang.System.out.println( java.lang.System.out.println() ); }}
>                                                           ^
>
>   This can be confusing for teachers and students. Often they
>   will not be consciously aware of the different systems of concepts
>   because they often do not study the JLS and the error messages
>   in such a depth, but they might subconsciously feel irritated
>   and get the feeling that something is confusing.

I will argue a more practical focused perspective: does
the error message clearly tell the developer what the problem
is? I think it does. Then I think it is all fine. Whether void
is a type or not is an academic discussion with little
practical relevance.

Arne

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

Thread

Re: void Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-07-16 18:34 -0400

csiph-web