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

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

Re: void

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

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

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

#34928 — Re: void

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

[toc] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web