On 10 August 2010 10:42, Eddie wrote:
> If your eclipse's target and src is set to the same as your javac, why
> would eclipse compiles and javac reject it?
>
because Eclipse uses its own (incremental) Java compiler:
http://www.eclipse.org/jdt/core/index.php
and whenever you have two impleme
If your eclipse's target and src is set to the same as your javac, why
would eclipse compiles and javac reject it?
On Aug 7, 1:40 am, JodaStephen wrote:
> BTW, as a parallel to this Scala discussion, consider generics in
> Java. I will argue that the total number of people that *fully*
> understa
I wish internal memory was a non-issue - it stands to be less of an
issue soon, as more Froyo apps allow install to SD card, but right now
(being the app collector that I am) I have to consider the size of
apps and whether they will take up internal memory if I want to
install them - for example Go
No I don't really disagree, just wanted to point out that it's not all
that bad for the N1, especially if you factor in the non-trivial
aspect of underlying software (just as much a part of the consumer
experience as hardware performance). You have to contrast this with
how the Dream/Sapphire/Droid
My goodness, what a tangled web you weave...
You're mutating an object AND using the return value at the same time
and you're doing it twice, in the same expression!
Then to add insult to injury, you now propose to add an implicit conversion
to the mix.
An implicit conversion that, itself, has sid
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/9/10 15:55 , Viktor Klang wrote:
>
>> So basically what you're saying that we have a problem where we
>> cannot assign a verified contract with the symbols/words?
I'm saying that a good developer won't have problems in being precise.
Give that t
A fun one.
for(long t = 0; t < System.currentTimeMillis(); ++t) {
}
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
javaposse+unsu
On 9 Aug., 17:02, Kevin Wright wrote:
> Well, Java has left-to-right evaluation, except when it doesn't
>
> x + y * z is equivalent to x.+(y.*(z)) NOT (x.+(y)).*(z)
x() + y() * z() is still evaluated as
invoke x
invoke y
invoke z
mul
add
it has nothing to do with operator precedence. The follo
get rid of operators and the argument becomes moot. + is just another symbol
for a method in that case. and for those that would complain about performance,
lets not confuse representation (or the API) (ie the language) with
implementation... 1 + 1 would still be compiled to a plus operator wher
Well, Java has left-to-right evaluation, except when it doesn't
x + y * z is equivalent to x.+(y.*(z)) NOT (x.+(y)).*(z)
x :: someList is equivalent to someList.::(x)
You also have this little gem in the Java spec:
"The Java programming language also guarantees that every operand of an
operato
:) My apologies. (I really need to work on not seeing all responses as
rebuttals.)
On Aug 9, 9:25 am, Viktor Klang wrote:
> Oh, sorry, I wasn't bashing your point, I was agreeing!
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Josh Berry wrote:
> > You twisted my point. My point is that you can make
You know - this argument gets rolled out every time operator
overloading comes up, but I posit this simple counter argument:
In Java, you have to write .add, .multiply etc. methods (e.g.
BigDecimal) because you can't overload the operators. This makes the
code a heck of a lot messier but doesn't b
I can't help but feel that the discussion has got a little bit lost in
the rough :-). I do wish I had pulled a better example out for that
original post, but lest anyone not remember, the point was to show how
closures (and in particular good language support for them) greatly
cuts boilerplate and
On 9 Aug., 13:50, Kevin Wright wrote:
> There's no implicit conversion here
> just a list, with a :: method, taking x as an argument
I'm sorry, I thought you were trying to make a point about the general
case and how operator overloading is simple and intuitive in the
general case. And if x and s
Well, sure in terms of processor benchmark the N1 is right up there,
and make no mistake, I love mine, however, the latest crop of phones
improve on the N1 in many ways, for example:
much more internal memory - 8 or 16 gigs is now the norm, plus SD card
expandability. The N1 only has 1 gig built i
I would challenge the first claim. I can not claim that they are more
ambiguous than symbols, but I challenge the thought that they are less
so. The second claim is true, but you can always use parentheses in
both cases.
Implicits can go awry, I'm sure. However, having them all defined
locally
It also helps that many lessons have been learnt from C++, the convention in
Scala is to be very pedantic about operator names.
For example, given a list the following two operations are not the same
someList plus x
someList add y
These operators are actually just aliases to their symbolic names
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Fabrizio Giudici <
fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it> wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 8/9/10 15:33 , Viktor Klang wrote:
> >> May I ask how you figure it's easier to misuse a symbol than a
> >> word? (wrong implementation of equals and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/9/10 15:33 , Viktor Klang wrote:
>> May I ask how you figure it's easier to misuse a symbol than a
>> word? (wrong implementation of equals and hashCode is one of the
>> most common java problems.)
For the same reason it's considered a good pract
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Fabrizio Giudici <
fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it> wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> >
> > On Aug 9, 3:07 am, Viktor Klang wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> ANY word/symbol can be defined to work in a way that is not
> >> intuitive, it doesn't mat
Oh, sorry, I wasn't bashing your point, I was agreeing!
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Josh Berry wrote:
> You twisted my point. My point is that you can make code that reads
> more like the domain you are modeling. Consider, if you are trying to
> implement an algorithm for processing data t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
>
> On Aug 9, 3:07 am, Viktor Klang wrote:
>>
>>
>> ANY word/symbol can be defined to work in a way that is not
>> intuitive, it doesn't matter if we call a method "plus" or "+" if
>> it's not doing addition, it'll be confusing anyway.
>>
There are
You twisted my point. My point is that you can make code that reads
more like the domain you are modeling. Consider, if you are trying to
implement an algorithm for processing data that is in a matrix. Which
do you find more readable, one that can look very similar to the paper
from which you ac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/9/10 13:50 , Kevin Wright wrote:
> There's no implicit conversion here just a list, with a :: method,
> taking x as an argument
>
> Each and every person reading this list is more than intelligent
> enough to understand Scala - feel free to state
Hi Fabrizio,
Thanks for the suggestion. It looks like I'm able to reinstall the
various plugins now.
Pity I don't have ZFS though...that would have been nice...
Regards,
Andrew.
On Aug 9, 5:47 pm, Fabrizio Giudici
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 8/9/10 09:01 ,
There's no implicit conversion here
just a list, with a :: method, taking x as an argument
Each and every person reading this list is more than intelligent enough to
understand Scala - feel free to state if you think you're not though!
Seriously folks, we all know *much* more complicated stuff th
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 16:06, Viktor Klang wrote:
> this discussion is becoming more and more blurred.
> There are infinitely different situations with different needs and different
> constraints, there is no point in trying to argue that solution X will work
> for everyone.
I think the OP fully
On 9 Aug., 11:47, Viktor Klang wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Ben Schulz wrote:
> > On 9 Aug., 11:02, Kevin Wright wrote:
> > > any operator ending with a `:` is also right associative. So
> > > x :: someList
> > > is equivalent to someList.::(x)
>
> > I think you just proved Fabrizio
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/9/10 11:39 , Ben Schulz wrote:
> On 9 Aug., 11:02, Kevin Wright wrote:
>> any operator ending with a `:` is also right associative. So x ::
>> someList is equivalent to someList.::(x)
>
> I think you just proved Fabrizio's point (and this is a o
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Ben Schulz wrote:
> On 9 Aug., 11:02, Kevin Wright wrote:
> > any operator ending with a `:` is also right associative. So
> > x :: someList
> > is equivalent to someList.::(x)
>
> I think you just proved Fabrizio's point (and this is a one-line
> example). ;)
>
On 9 Aug., 11:02, Kevin Wright wrote:
> any operator ending with a `:` is also right associative. So
> x :: someList
> is equivalent to someList.::(x)
I think you just proved Fabrizio's point (and this is a one-line
example). ;)
With kind regards
Ben
--
You received this message because you ar
I had a different error which was due to the fact that I did an
install via sudo and the updates could not update all files.
I ended up in uninstalling, downloading the full 6.9.1 package and
reinstalling using a different folder in /opt/netbeans (to which I
gave full permissions and changed owner
I think Scala has definitely improved on C++ in this regard :)
C++ had a very clear (and restricted) idea of what operators were available,
and could be overloaded - using method names like operator_+
You also had to decide if you wanted your operator to be a friend, or to be
a member, it very qui
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/8/10 17:35 , Josh Berry wrote:
> It seems that the thing that is "off" in all of this discussion is
> that we are trying to determine which is more complex between the
> languages, when what we really care about are the programs written
> in thos
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/9/10 09:01 , Andrew wrote:
>
> Is this likely to be recoverable when the update site is available
> again, or will I need to reinstall (Eclipse :-))?
You just need to erase everything under $HOME/.netbeans/6.9 (you might
want to backup it, so eve
It's now 200 episodes (and over three years) since the Java Posse
Memorizable site (http://memorize.com/java-posse) was last updated.
Yet it's maintenance is still credited and thanked at the end of every
show. Brilliant!
The only reason that I can think of is steadfast loyalty. Loyalty or
optim
I find it rather amusing that people argue that being able to create methods
that are familiar symbols (+,-,* etc) leads to code that is hard to
understand. This is a false statement.
ANY word/symbol can be defined to work in a way that is not intuitive, it
doesn't matter if we call a method "plus
Hi,
I was prompted today to apply updates to Netbeans which I did, however
it has completely hosed my install as all the installed modules are
now inactive, and whenever I try and activate them I get a lovely
message like this:
Activation failed: Not all requested modules can be enabled:
[Standar
38 matches
Mail list logo
