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

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #23868 > unrolled thread

cannot find symbol?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  cannot find symbol? qwertmonkey@syberianoutpost.ru - 2013-05-07 01:00 +0000
    Re: cannot find symbol? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-05-06 18:29 -0700
      Re: cannot find symbol? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-05-06 22:01 -0400
    Re: cannot find symbol? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-05-06 21:57 -0400
    Re: cannot find symbol? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-05-06 23:32 -0400
      Re: cannot find symbol? Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-05-07 08:02 -0700

#23868 — cannot find symbol?

> ... You, apparently, are sociopathic.
~ 
 I wonder what will be next: nazi lover? child molester? U.S. government snitch?
~ 
 When I see you guys ganging up against someone just for mixing up coding styles
I find so cool not being "normed"!
~ 
 lbrtchx

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#23871

qwert...@syberianoutpost.ru wrote:
>> ... You, apparently, are sociopathic.

You didn't even attribute that quote correctly.

> ~ 

What's with the tildes?

>  I wonder what will be next: nazi lover? child molester? U.S. government snitch?

It's spelled "Nazi", not "nazi".

It wasn't a random epithet. One definition of "sociopathic" is "of, relating to, or characterized by 
asocial or antisocial behavior". Your behavior conforms to that definition. It's an objective assessment 
supported by the evidence you provided. You have given no evidence that you love in a Nazi style, 
nor that you molest children, nor that you snitch on the U.S. government. You have given ample 
evidence of sociopathy.

>  When I see you guys ganging up against someone just for mixing up coding styles
> I find so cool not being "normed"!

We're not "ganging up against someone". You evinced certain behavior. You refuse to follow 
social norms. You even do so to your own detriment. That seems like less than intelligent 
decision-making. You were given advice *to help you* and you call it "ganging up against someone". 

You can justify and excuse your behavior all you want, it's still sociopathic.

You've been asked dozens of times not to fragment threads. Yet you still do it.

You've moved beyond obstinacy to hostility. People have asked you nicely to conform to certain 
conventions to show respect and, again, *to help you*. You are nasty in return. To heck with you.

-- 
Lew

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23877

On 5/6/2013 9:29 PM, Lew wrote:
> qwert...@syberianoutpost.ru wrote:
>>> ... You, apparently, are sociopathic.

>>   I wonder what will be next: nazi lover? child molester? U.S. government snitch?

> It wasn't a random epithet. One definition of "sociopathic" is "of, relating to, or characterized by
> asocial or antisocial behavior". Your behavior conforms to that definition. It's an objective assessment
> supported by the evidence you provided.

I believe sociapathic (aka antisocial/dissocial personality disorder)
is a diagnosis that should be left to those with a relevant background
to make such diagnoses.

It is not something skills in Java makes one competent to do.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23876

On 5/6/2013 9:00 PM, qwertmonkey@syberianoutpost.ru wrote:
>> ... You, apparently, are sociopathic.
> ~
>   I wonder what will be next: nazi lover? child molester? U.S. government snitch?
> ~
>   When I see you guys ganging up against someone just for mixing up coding styles
> I find so cool not being "normed"!

I think Lew's comment was out of line.

But if you read what people reply to you then you would have noted
that many people don't want to read and try and understand your
question because you are making it to difficult to read your code.

It is not smart to discourage some very smart people from
contributing with solutions.

It is not nice to be so disrespectful that you make those
trying to help you work harder than they have to.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23879

On 5/6/2013 9:00 PM, qwertmonkey@syberianoutpost.ru wrote:
>> ... You, apparently, are sociopathic.
> ~
>   I wonder what will be next: nazi lover? child molester? U.S. government snitch?
> ~
>   When I see you guys ganging up against someone just for mixing up coding styles
> I find so cool not being "normed"!

     You seem to have missed an important point: *You* have a
problem and *you* are asking people for help.  In essence, you
are in the position of a beggar, offering no inducement, no
recompense, no tangible reward to a prospective rescuer other
than that which the rescuer may find within him or herself.
If you want to beg successfully, you must curry favor with those
from whom you beg favors.  If you rail against the people who
might help you and drive them away, you make it less likely that
you will receive assistance.

     When you ask help from me, I am not bound to tolerate your
eccentricities; if they're extreme, it's easier for me to just
walk on by and ignore your tin cup.  Were I seeking your help
things would be different -- but I'm not, and you are, and where,
pray tell, do you choose to go from here, eh?

     If all you want to be is cool, you may be left in the cold.

-- 
Eric Sosman
esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23891

On 5/6/13 8:32 PM, Eric Sosman wrote:
>      If all you want to be is cool, you may be left in the cold.
>
I like that, is that your own or a quote/paraphrase from somewhere else?

Anyway, I've offered some help to the OP, including other design 
choices, and the suggestion that using Reflect on methods is the way to 
go for his current design choice.  It seems like the message is "I don't 
want the solution, I want it to work the way I'm doing it."

I understand the engineering goal.  If the had originally said something 
along the lines "I have a requirement that I take a command line and 
automatically marshal it to match a method call, and then I call that 
method". Then I think less of the suggestions would have been noise. 
The solution is to stop avoiding the Class.get* methods and actually 
read up on how they work, and apply that new knowledge to the problem. 
Done.


At the same time, the coding convention confuses matters. Since it is 
non-standard, it makes it difficult for experienced programmers and 
engineers to decipher.  The suggestions then turned to "how to receive 
better help from this group."

Like many trolls, the OP decided to take that and run.  Saying "I'm a 
unique flower! Don't try to change me!"  The truth is that when you ask 
for enlightenment, you are asking to be changed.  The change you receive 
may not be the change you seek.

This is the last of the effort I will spend on this thread.  The OP has 
one more chance to receive my help, as I'm more forgiving than some. 
Any more troll-like behavior and I will write them off completely.

Good luck qwertymonkey, I hope you find the enlightenment you seek.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web