Path: csiph.com!eeepc.pasdenom.info!news.pasdenom.info!news.dougwise.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Roedy Green Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2011 15:02:37 -0800 Organization: Canadian Mind Products Lines: 20 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: Roedy Green NNTP-Posting-Host: RCd/Ul4tyxGUBII8WGwa5g.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:25644 On Sat, 05 Feb 2011 11:43:18 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : > >Why was there even a need to spell out the size of a char? If you wanted >types with explicit sizes, there was already byte, short, int and long. I think because Java's designers thought on the byte code level. There, chars are unsigned 16-bit. That they are used for chars was not really of interest to them. Much of Java is just a thin wrapper around byte code. It has no high level features of its own. -- Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com To err is human, but to really foul things up requires a computer. ~ Farmer's Almanac It is breathtaking how a misplaced comma in a computer program can shred megabytes of data in seconds.