7.0 wishlist?

L

Lew

[snip]

NO. DO NOT POST WHILE I AM STILL CATCHING UP. WAIT 24 HOURS FIRST.
But your name is Paul.

No, it is not.

Stop lying about me, and stop lying about him. He probably doesn't
like it any more than I do, and whatever I may have done (in your
opinion!) to deserve your wrath, he is but an innocent bystander.
(And, apparently, a dead one, hence in no shape to speak up in his own
defense. Please, for the love of God, even if you won't be civil or
reasonable towards me at all, at least have some modicum of respect
for the dead!)

Oh, shut up. Stop inventing new personae with which to harass this group. Go
away.

I will not wait 24 hours. Shut up.
 
T

twerpinator

[snip]

NO. DO NOT POST WHILE I AM STILL CATCHING UP. WAIT 24 HOURS FIRST.
NO. DO NOT POST WHILE I AM STILL CATCHING UP. WAIT 24 HOURS FIRST.

[misquotes and insults me]

Do not misquote me again. Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. That is incorrect. Stop being dishonest.

None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
[threats deleted]

I don't respond well to threats.
Class instruction [vicious implied insults deleted]

No, you're the stupid one.

None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Hypocrite. Brazen and flagrant hypocrite. UNBELIEVABLE MOTHERFUCKING
COCKSUCKING HYPOCRITE!!

I have been mostly absent from this newsgroup for much of the past
year. On the other hand, I know how much assholes love to diss me
"behind my back" or where they think I'm no longer looking, so I did a
google search and sure enough, people had been badmouthing Twisted
here, quite spontaneously, despite that absence.

Including you.

You attacked me /in absentia/, forcing me to come back here to reply
in my own defense, and then a bunch of your asshole buddies ganged up
on me (as usual), and then you had the sheer, unrepentant gall to tell
me "if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen"???

I HAD gotten out of the "kitchen", and you more or less dragged me
back kicking and screaming!

What the **** is your problem? Or Arne's, or anyone else's? Can you
not let sleeping dogs lie? Can you not let go of a grudge? Can you not
let bygones be bygones? Even if so, can you also not get your FUCKING
KILLFILES TO WORK?

Sheesh! What is WRONG with you people??? You are incapable of simply
disagreeing with someone without believing that they must therefore be
wrong/stupid/crazy, and you can't believe THAT without attempting to
publicly humiliate them. Once you manage to get someone to leave, you
don't even stop there. You follow him to other newsgroups, or you keep
badmouthing him in the one he left, at random times. You just can't
leave me alone, can you? You're fucking obsessed!

Not only that, but a quick google search of the newsgroup for each of
your names turns up, in most cases, several longish threads at various
times in the past several months. Examining these threads shows that
you have gotten embroiled in similar, if less bitter, disputes with
several other people in the newsgroup, most of whom appear to have
been trying to participate in discussions of Java programming in good
faith, only to get increasingly irritated by your incessant nitpicking
and minor public putdowns -- same way it started with me. Apparently
some fraction of people just don't take that kind of nonsense lying
down, and eventually they stand up and say "Enough! You've been
insulting me and making little digs at me in public for a week now.
That is disrespectful and rude. Stop it! If you disagree with me,
disagree like a civilized man, not like some rabid animal." And then
you lot completely fly off the handle and a flamewar starts, because
you arrogantly believe you have some sort of God-given superiority-
induced right to be callous, rude, and disrespectful to anyone you
think is your inferior, and that it is some sort of "lese majeste" for
anyone to dare call you on your behavior. Basically, you act like
nobility or aristrocracy of old, with a sense of entitlement and a
superiority complex, when you're really just a bunch of losers (SORE
losers, when you lose an argument) with no social lives and thus no
other way to get your rocks off except by strutting about and stepping
on people like you think you're some sort of demigods, and then
turning viciously, and in a pack rather than separately, upon anyone
who dares stand up to your nasty behavior.

You're not superior at all, though.

You're pathetic.

What a bunch of miserable, nasty, angry losers. Can't get a date -- go
stomp on some poor guy's face on the internet, that'll make you feel
better!

My sole comfort in all of this stems from the knowledge that I am no
longer alone, that others have suffered your depradations, if not
fought back as militantly or as valiantly as I have, and that some of
those others have as big an aversion to knuckling under as I do.

Now the lot of you -- go see your shrinks. Some deep-seated
psychological need fuels your obesssion with me, your obsession with
Paul (wherever he may be), and your arrogance, as exemplified by your
casual blaspheming, your casual rudeness and callousness, your sense
of entitlement and of not being bound by the rules (such as to remain
on topic about Java here), your sense of superiority and justification
in stepping on other people and being openly and publicly disdainful
to everyone that isn't in full agreement with you about everything,
and your inability to let go of anything for very long. You can't go
for more than a few weeks without reflexively invoking the "Twisted is
evil" meme in some way, shape, or form, anywhere you can shoehorn it
in, even if it's completely irrelevant to its surroundings. Clearly,
you are sick and need help.

Your behavior disrupts this newsgroup. It contributes to the vast
majority of off-topic postings here; I could about 5% spam, 5% random
nonsense from random sources, 45% you lot ragging on one person or
another for their perceived faults and inadequacies, or else randomly
taking unprovoked potshots at me /in absentia/, and 45% people
(including me) fighting back in response to your 45%. So you're
directly responsible for nearly half, and indirectly for nearly all,
of this newsgroup's off-topic traffic. And it's a lot, in absolute
volume (~30-40 posts a day at my estimate) and relative (your nonsense
and its replies comprise maybe 10% of the entire traffic volume for
this group -- do you really think your personal beefs with me and a
handful of other people merits that much traffic IN A JAVA NEWSGROUP?!
The sheer arrogance!)

Furthermore, your behavior may put off newcomers. Flame threads not
involving them may put them off -- "looks like a rough joint, I don't
think I want to go in there". And being nitpicky, unfriendly, and
generally insulting and dismissive towards a sizable proportion of
newcomers making good-faith posts is going to put them off even more.
Arne is the worst for this, particularly brutish and short-tempered,
and prone to bulldog obsessiveness in mauling his chosen target-du-
jour, but none of you lot are much better.

Last but not least, the time you spend being vicious and nasty here,
grinding your various axes, is time NOT spent productively writing
about Java here. Many of you (though not some of the especially
trollish, though these latter tend to come and go rather than persist,
or rather tend to follow me from newsgroup to newsgroup rather than
remain in cljp) appear to have a fair amount of Java expertise, though
unfortunately you rarely help anyone with any of it without doing so
in a way seemingly calculated to make them look stupid in front of an
audience.

If you would only spend the time and energy you currently use to
attack people instead to respond to more of the Java-related traffic,
and would furthermore make an effort to check your superiority complex
and its attendant rudeness at the door, the effects could be
profoundly beneficial. This could become an excellent technical forum
with genteel decorum, instead of the rough and somewhat dangerous dive
it is now.

For a role model, you need look no farther than Patricia Shanahan. She
has not been perfect, having mildly insulted me herself on one or two
occasions, but she's a paragon of virtue compared to you lot.
Knowledgeable, patient, and most of all, lacking that disdainful
superior condescending attitude that all but oozes from every pore of
your rankly smelling bodies. She's the one for you to emulate, if you
aspire to join civilized society sometime soon.

Please see your psychiatrists now, and please refrain from posting any
more fighting posts until you have done so. Or, preferably, until
never.
I most likely get far more messages (between email and newsgroup
postings) in a day then you do, yet I have no problems keeping up with
it all.

Neither do I. I just have better things to spend my time on than
posting counter-propaganda, so the less of your pointless attack
propaganda I have to counter, the better. For both of us, since I'm
sure your time is valuable too, and it is definitely not productively
spent on a futile propaganda campaign. It's negative-sum behavior --
you waste some of your time to waste some of my time, and get nothing
out of it.

Keep in mind also that you have ganged up on me. Several of you are
attacking one of me, which means if you spend say one hour a week
posting nonsense about me I end up spending roughly *five* responding,
assuming that we all take equal amounts of time to read one post and,
separately, equal-but-longer amounts of time to write one post.

Not only is this clearly grossly unfair, it also means that a point is
reached where your catching up is still below some threshold of time-
wastiness but mine has risen above it, all other things being equal
except our respective numbers.

That you're currently also fighting someone else, Harry Yarrow or
whatever his name was, dilutes that by 50% at most, so I'm still
spending 2.5x as much time a week on this as any single one of you is.
Assuming you all divide your time evenly among your current targets,
of course.

Ultimately, though, it's all very wasteful. A first reasonable de-
escalation step that will save all of us a lot of time is if you all
resolve to limit your attack-posting to one day a week, and that you
do not update your view of the newsgroup until you've said your fill
of nastiness for the week, so we don't get locked into a cycle where
you post something nasty, I post to defend myself, you refresh within
a few minutes and immediately post a nasty followup, I (using Google
Groups, unavoidably) see your new post immediately and must respond,
and so forth.

After that, de-escalation can proceed by a scaling-back. Perhaps with
a quota, initially of 10 nasty posts a week and diminishing by one a
week. (That means I have to respond to a whopping 50 or so in that
first week, 45 in the second, and so on, by the way.)

At the end of it, there will be a tenth week in which you each say
your final piece about me, and then I post a final rebuttal of
whatever you each said about me. And then we leave one another in
peace.

This will end the pointless fighting and the wasting of time that is
happening, without you seeming to just capitulate abruptly. My final
round of replies will be purely defensive, without any "you're the
liar" or similar that you might feel cannot be allowed to stand
unopposed. So at the end nobody will have outstanding unchallenged
insults standing against them -- a tie score, no winners, but no
losers. You are determined not to lose and you won't. I am determined
not to lose and I won't. That's as close to win-win as we can
conceivably get in this situation.

At the end of that, detente.

I suggest you come to a similar accomodation with Harry and anyone
else you might be mistreating that is showing a tendency to fight back
instead of lie down and take it. Also that you stop being quite as ...
"rough" with the newbies, who by and large don't deserve the scorn and
open ridicule that is often heaped upon them by you lot.

Do that as well, and we don't just all not lose; we all win. And the
newbies also win.

It's really rather hard to argue with that, unless you really are
incorrigible haters out for blood with callous disregard for the
effects on yourselves and others.

Please prove to all of us that you are not.

Detente is offered, on not-unfavorable terms. Will you accept it?
[implied insults deleted]

None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
And don't try to [implied insults deleted]

None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
AND STOP BLOODY SHOUTING!

You first.

Yes, I know you're not (except right there, above) using all-caps.
Instead you're using numbers, several of you versus one of me (and one
of some other guy, separately), and repetition (several essentially-
identical insulting and off-topic posts a week about me, each). But it
amounts to the same thing.

Trying to outshout each other regarding who we think is the bigger
idiot is wasting time and effort for all of us; see above for a way
out that all of us might find acceptable, if none of you are too
unreasonable or too set upon outright-malicious goals.
 
F

fencore1

[snip]

NO. DO NOT POST WHILE I AM STILL CATCHING UP. WAIT 24 HOURS FIRST.
[snip]

NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
Oh, shut up.

I do not take orders from you.
[insult deleted]

The ones doing the harassing are you.

None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
[threat deleted][barked orders deleted]

I don't respond well to threats.
 
A

Arne Vajhøj

Mike said:
Arne said:
[snip]

NO. DO NOT POST WHILE I AM STILL CATCHING UP. WAIT 24 HOURS FIRST.
Did that type of giving order succeed last time you tried ?

A more general question:

Has one Usenet poster, giving orders to another about where and
when to post, ever been obeyed?

I think it is about as rare as pigs flying.

Arne
 
H

Harold Yarmouth

Andreas said:
A claim of mine, which I partially revoked in a followup later.
I mistakenly thought the two classes mentioned there to be in
a subclass-relation, but they were siblings. The flaw,
however, still exists with respect to AbstractHashMap.
What?


That's of course right, but has another set of implications:
To even make it possible for a null-forbidding Map-implementation,
Map itself would need to be declared as forbidding nulls

Nah. Map<String,Boolean> would allow Boolean.TRUE, Boolean.FALSE, and
null values. Map said:
Which is too much risk. When we're talking about safety

We're NOT talking about safety. We're talking about catching bugs closer
to their source, in the vast majority of cases. There would still be the
normal null check on use -- so if a null did sneak by due to a
concurrency issue, you'd get an NPE thrown at the point of use of that
reference, just as occurs in current Java. You wouldn't get a VM crash
or whatever you were thinking of.
This need not be an a-priori problem: the other thread might
get the old value or the new value, but it should never ever
get an inconsistent rule-breaking new value.

That can always happen with a data race, if the value is composite or is
changed "simultaneously" with some other value with which it's supposed
to have a particular relationship.
getField(src),dup,if_null_throw_NPE,putField(tgt)

That version is probably best. It does not involve extra hidden local
variables, just some inspecting in a VM register or similar.
... is the whole point of non-null marked variables and fields.

My intent was to catch "nearly all" nulls getting into places they don't
belong as soon as they do so, rather than (currently) only catching them
when something tries to dereference them. Catching 99% of nulls getting
into the parts of the system that aren't supposed to have nulls would
mean 99% of null-related bugs produced error messages pointing closer to
the actual site of the error, which is a touch less than 100% but a heck
of a lot more than the present fraction, maybe 50% (from the cases where
nulls get into something that's immediately used, and where explicit
null checks have been coded to throw NPE or IAE).

If you think you can change "nearly all" to "all" without much of a
runtime performance penalty, though, and limited to
nullable-assigned-to-nonlocal-nonnull, that's fine.
In such a block of code, choosing unique names for the exception
arguments is (imho) the very least of all problems. Usually you
should also log each of the interims exceptions, anyway.

That rather depends on the application. Software for desktop users
shouldn't be quietly clogging the user's hard drive with log files they
won't even suspect exists, as a rule.
Maybe such nested hierarchies are not rare, but such nested
hierarchies where the thrown exceptions are not even looked
at *are* rare.

These are "looked at", in so far as their class determines whether they
get caught and what handler gets run, but generally "it failed to read
this file" is all it needs to know, not whether it was an unexpected
too-early EOF or someone unplugged an external drive that hosted the
file or something.
 
H

Harold Yarmouth

Joshua said:

Yes, you did.
The opinions I have formed in the past few days

have nothing to do with Java and are incorrect anyways. Please refrain
from discussing them here. This is not the appropriate forum for that
subject matter. It is a forum for Java subject matter.
That's the point. Expressions have side effects. They must occur in a
precisely specified order; chiefly, that means you can't rearrange them
and expect them to work.

Math expressions rarely have side effects, and math is the primary
target for operator overloading.
That doesn't cut it.

Yes, it does, and if you insult me in public ONE MORE TIME I'll ...
You said that I hate operator overloading.

I said that you appear to hate operator overloading. The fact that any
attempt to propose operator overloading gets shot down with extreme
prejudice by you is my evidence. You have supplied no evidence to the
contrary, save your word, which, after the several incorrect statements
you have made here recently about me, is mud.
To paraphrase xkcd: Logic. It works, bitch.

Cursing at me won't change the facts: you were wrong, about me and about
the feasibility of operator overloading.
 
H

Harold Yarmouth

Lew said:
None of the nasty things "Harold" says or implies about you are true,
Joshua.

I did not say anything nasty about him, other than perhaps to point out
that his behavior was uncalled-for and rude. Which it was.
 
H

Harold Yarmouth

Hendrik said:
Do we? I am sorry, I do not understand what you mean with this constant
pool? Mind explaining?

Where string constants, among perhaps some other things, presently live.
I see no reason why [a,b] would not create a new pair in the
background each time.
No existing literal does so, other than primitive literals, and those
only because primitives are passed by value rather than by reference.

Well, yes, but that is an easy claim, since the only non-primitive
literals allowed at this point are Strings.

True, but my point was that the division logically should be based on
whether the object is passed by value or by reference.
And there are enough old
threads explaining the intern() system to newbies, or even among more
experienced people, so I am afraid introducing similar features for
other things than strings will make Java much more difficult to use.
But that isn’t a concern of you, if I interpret your vision correctly.

Not true. I have no wish to see Java more difficult to use.

Furthermore, I never proposed explicit interning for (immutable) arrays.
Indeed, I only proposed interning unmodified, compile-time-constant
literal arrays as a bit of an efficiency improvement; the main thing
originally discussed was allowing array literals in more places. Last
but not least, nobody has to deal with string interning if they don't
want to, generally speaking -- only if they want to sometimes use == to
test for string equality, or have lots of identical strings and memory
consumption problems. (And since String.equals() first tests with ==
anyway, and method call overhead is negligible on a final class in the
Hotspot VM, == on interned strings is only faster than .equals() when
the strings are long and are usually found not to be equal. Long strings
might be best tested in four steps, though -- == (if true, return true),
length() (if not equal, return false), hashCode() (if not equal, return
false; String caches hashcode, and the length is loaded to do the length
test so already in a register for the
is-it-long-enough-to-do-the-hashcode-test test), and then
character-by-character testing.)

Actually the worst case is equal length and equal right up to the last
character. A not-uncommon bad case is lots of equal length strings with
a long common prefix. Package names, URLs, properties keys, filesystem
paths, and other dotted or path-like hierarchical names are the usual
suspects.
What I wanted to say is: to me it isn’t obvious that literals should
also be unique objects.

In general, they should not be; the division I thought best was based on
the type's pass-by semantics and mutability: reference to unique object
if immutable and passed by reference, new copy each time if mutable or
passed by value. This is consistent with the existing behavior of String
and primitive literals, and seems sensible.
 
J

Joshua Cranmer

Harold said:
Yes, you did.

Discussing whether or not I insulted you or you insulted me is off-topic
for this forum.
have nothing to do with Java and are incorrect anyways. Please refrain
from discussing them here. This is not the appropriate forum for that
subject matter. It is a forum for Java subject matter.

Discussing whether or not this subject matter is on- or off-topic for
this newsgroup is off-topic for this forum. It is a forum for Java
subject matter.
Math expressions rarely have side effects, and math is the primary
target for operator overloading.

I gave you an example.

((array[i++] << 8) & 0xff) | (array[i++] & 0xff)

That is side effects. Reordering the expressions changes the meaning
considerably.
>
> Yes, it does, and if you insult me in public ONE MORE TIME I'll ...

Stop insulting me!

/me hooks up a meeting between Harold, Twisted, zerg, and JSH.

Anyone else wishing to attend, please bring along your LARTs. You may
also invite a friend, like those dinners in /Le Dîner de Cons/.
 
H

Harold Yarmouth

Joshua said:
The places to go are the mailing lists

We are discussing the best Usenet newsgroup for this topic. Non-Usenet
fora are not relevant to such a discussion.

(This part seems to no longer have anything to do with Java, only with
newsgroup topic bounds. Please do not reply to this part.)
You don't need connections. Anyone can post to the relevant mailing
lists.

I'm not interested in mailing lists. I'm interested in discussing Java
here. Since you apparently are not, it is you who is posting to the
wrong newsgroup.

(This part seems to no longer have anything to do with Java, only with
newsgroup topic bounds. Please do not reply to this part.)
Note that people also tend to be more responsive to ideas if
people have the code to back it up.

How can I have? As I believe I've already mentioned a time or two, I'm
not a Sun engineer or bigwig with access to their internal stuff. Ergo,
no code.

And even if I had it I wouldn't know where to begin making these kinds
of changes. I'm just a Java programmer, not an expert on JVM internals
or compiler theory. I leave those areas to those who do have the
relevant expertise.

I don't believe there is any truth to your implication that nobody
should be posting here, or at least suggesting new language features, if
they don't have JVM/compiler expertise. Experience using Java should be,
and in my opinion is, the sole prerequisite.

Actually, given freedom of speech and that this is an unmoderated group
and that anything to do with Java programming falls within its topic
bounds, I daresay there is actually no prerequisite whatsoever, save to
the extent that Java knowledge is required to be able to be, and stay,
on topic.

I have that level of knowledge. Just not the compiler/JVM expertise you
apparently think I should have. Sorry to disappoint, but, them's the breaks.

Now please stop being noisome and critical just because I turned out not
to have some sort of expertise you'd have preferred I had. If you're
just going to be Mr. Negativity, please be Mr. Negativity in some other
newsgroup. This is comp.lang.java.programmer, not comp.lang.java.negativity.

(This part seems to no longer have anything to do with Java, only with
how much expertise various people have or allegedly should have. Please
do not reply to this part.)
I am going to guess that this is hyperbole, since this would imply that
you are declaring new variables at roughly the rate of one per line of
code.

It's called "lots of short methods and small classes". If your methods
average 20 lines, typically have several parameters and local variables,
and your classes typically have several fields and not too many methods,
you can easily end up with a declarations-per-line-of-code in the 1-10
range.

(This part seems to still be Java-related. Please feel free to reply to
this part.)
I do not know your personality; I can only extrapolate based on the
average of the groups among which I interact until I receive information
that counteracts the assumptions.

Okay, that just sounds pretentious... :-/

ACK.

Personality is irrelevant. You shouldn't be rude to everyone just
because a lot of the people you deal with apparently have thick skins
and tend to just shrug it off. Being rude is still, well, rude.

(This part seems to no longer have anything to do with Java, only with
etiquette. Please do not reply to this part.)
The most I have done, to my recollection, is suggest that ...

Now, now, there's really no need to be repeating your unpleasant, and
incorrect, insinuations about me.

(This part seems to no longer have anything to do with Java, only with
your opinions about a person that happens to be a Java programmer.
Please do not reply to this part.)
 
H

Harold Yarmouth

Hendrik said:
Whatever, I should stop responding to this kind of stuff.

Since it's not Java-related, yes, you should, but for the same reason,
you should also avoid the actions that bring such subject-matters up in
the first place.
Doing a fruitless search if of course never worth doing

Okay, then. I guess that settles that!
but you can only know that it is fruitless after you did the search.

No, as I just demonstrated, you can often predict in advance that
certain searches will be fruitless.
This is getting philosophical, so I will drop it here.

A better reason is that it's becoming no longer Java-specific.
Oh, now it is you who calls me a jerk. But guess what? I am not
insulted. It takes more to insult me and I don’t think you’ll ever manage!

Insulting my ability to insult people now? Tsk, tsk. I wasn't trying to
insult you. If I had been, I would not have written "no offense". And
you WOULD have been insulted.

:)

But this, too, has drifted away from being relevant to Java.

Oh, but you did. You did.
Ooh, now I insulted you again, by implying you know nothing of linguistics!

Not really. I'm not expected to know linguistics here (though I actually
do know some). Implying I knew nothing of Java would be insulting here.
Implying I knew nothing of linguistics would be insulting in
alt.comp.linguistics, I suppose, if for some reason I were ever to post
there.
 
H

Harold Yarmouth

Lew said:
Harold Yarmouth schreef:



None of the nasty things "Harold" says or implies about you, Hendrik,
are true.

Don't worry, "Lew", I was not trying to actually insult anyone. (I do
notice that you trimmed the part of the quoted text where I originally
had made this clear by saying "no offense", though.)

In fact, at this point it looks like it is you who is trying to insult
someone.
 
H

Harold Yarmouth

Hendrik said:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Lew schreef:

But I was not trying to insult you. Lew didn't deign to quote it, but I
did say "no offense".
Cheers Lew, I know. Let’s just hope he comes to reason

Aww, now you turn around and insult me for no good reason. Maybe it's an
obsessive-compulsive tic and not really under your control or something.
I don't know. Don't bother trying to make excuses for this sort of
behavior, though. I wouldn't be satisfied with anything less than
justifications, and although justifications are excuses, the vast
majority of excuses are not justifications. (Least of all "the dog ate
my homework!")
I remember being annoyed by your postings for a while as
well, but I too much value your contributions, and by now I’ve learnt to
not bother with things as unimportant as personal annoyances.

Personal attacks and potentially-career-damaging insinuations made in
public and before an audience go beyond merely being "personal
annoyances", in my opinion.
 
H

Harold Yarmouth

I am certainly far more reasonable than anyone that is continuing to
make these sorts of nasty public insinuations about me.
I apologize for having annoyed you.

Do I get one too?
 
H

Harold Yarmouth

Joshua said:
This can't just be you and I who are the only ones with thick skins...

Brevity is a virtue. Try

"This can't just be you and I who are the only callous ones"

Thick skins == callous -- ask any medical expert. And having too thick a
skin to personal attacks apparently makes you callous on the Internet.
 
J

Joshua Cranmer

Harold said:
We are discussing the best Usenet newsgroup for this topic. Non-Usenet
fora are not relevant to such a discussion.

We are discussing places to go. No need to limit yourself to newsgroups.
I'm not interested in mailing lists. I'm interested in discussing Java
here. Since you apparently are not, it is you who is posting to the
wrong newsgroup.

Mailing lists are where the real action happens for all kinds of
specification development (W3C uses them almost exclusively). If you
seriously want this features, you will have to go there.
How can I have? As I believe I've already mentioned a time or two, I'm
not a Sun engineer or bigwig with access to their internal stuff. Ergo,
no code.

Yes you do.
/me whacks Harold (don't feel bad, I do this to everybody).
And even if I had it I wouldn't know where to begin making these kinds
of changes. I'm just a Java programmer, not an expert on JVM internals
or compiler theory. I leave those areas to those who do have the
relevant expertise.

<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk...883246/src/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/>

If you're a half-way decent programmer who can read decent code, it
shouldn't take you more than two hours to start putting your own stuff
in. By the standards of what I've seen, that's bloody easy to read.
I don't believe there is any truth to your implication that nobody
should be posting here, or at least suggesting new language features, if
they don't have JVM/compiler expertise. Experience using Java should be,
and in my opinion is, the sole prerequisite.

From my discussions with actual spec writers, the only way to get stuff
working is to put show us the code.
I have that level of knowledge. Just not the compiler/JVM expertise you
apparently think I should have. Sorry to disappoint, but, them's the
breaks.

Right. I have not taken a single formal class on compiler theory or
virtual machine theory; the only things I have done are read the specs,
read the actual code, and hacked on a Java decompiler which is actually
fairly impressive given the limited amount of time I've spent on it.

Good programmers can learn by example.
Personality is irrelevant. You shouldn't be rude to everyone just
because a lot of the people you deal with apparently have thick skins
and tend to just shrug it off. Being rude is still, well, rude.

I just asked my roommate. He agrees with me. Would you like me to
collect opinions from the rest of my classmates and hallmates?

In terms of personality aspects, it seems you're in the minority here.
 
H

Hendrik Maryns

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

(e-mail address removed) schreef:
Mike Schilling wrote:
[snip]

NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!

Does anybody understand this?
No. None of the nasty things that either of you have said or implied
about me are at all true.

I wonder whether he has set this as a signature in some mail program.
Is G2 google groups?

LOL, H.
- --
Hendrik Maryns
http://tcl.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/~hendrik/
==================
Ask smart questions, get good answers:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkkYH/0ACgkQBGFP0CTku6O1qACgpvqwlxvb9CwEJgS37nNp21JY
gUsAoId/qngPHR8Q4ptIMAmsUnWrrR6w
=27BD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
H

Hendrik Maryns

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Harold Yarmouth schreef:
Where string constants, among perhaps some other things, presently live.

Do you know of those other things? I don’t but there might be some.
Maybe the .class objects live there as well. Hm, maybe one day I should
study the jvm spec and implementation.
I see no reason why [a,b] would not create a new pair in the
background each time.
No existing literal does so, other than primitive literals, and those
only because primitives are passed by value rather than by reference.

Well, yes, but that is an easy claim, since the only non-primitive
literals allowed at this point are Strings.

True, but my point was that the division logically should be based on
whether the object is passed by value or by reference.

Makes sense, but already the fact that you have to think about the
pass-by method makes the concept more difficult to grasp. I shudder at
the thought having to explain this to newcomers.
Not true. I have no wish to see Java more difficult to use.

Good, then I must have misunderstood you, for which I beg pardon.
Furthermore, I never proposed explicit interning for (immutable) arrays.
Indeed, I only proposed interning unmodified, compile-time-constant
literal arrays as a bit of an efficiency improvement; the main thing
originally discussed was allowing array literals in more places.

Ah, that is a fine distinction indeed, which I didn’t think of before.
This way, it might be worth the effort.

In general, they should not be; the division I thought best was based on
the type's pass-by semantics and mutability: reference to unique object
if immutable and passed by reference, new copy each time if mutable or
passed by value. This is consistent with the existing behavior of String
and primitive literals, and seems sensible.

It does, but let me think about this a bit:

{ 1, 3 } is an array, so should, like any array in Java, be passed by
reference.

Now, is it mutable? Take the method

public void nasty(int[] ints) {
ints[0] = 0;
// other stuff
}

What do you propose would happen if you did nasty({ 1, 3 })? Without
the comment, nothing of course, but let’s just assume the ‘other stuff’
does more with the array, like use its values.

So I’d say: even you literal is mutable. I don’t think it is desirable
to introduce new behavior here.

H.
- --
Hendrik Maryns
http://tcl.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/~hendrik/
==================
Ask smart questions, get good answers:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkkYJBMACgkQBGFP0CTku6NTzQCgxwr/wCHFD98b38B1rFjsxDU8
sSsAnRT+46WkUSrFVDrVPYqRpwaHKVAP
=JEKK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,776
Messages
2,569,603
Members
45,197
Latest member
ScottChare

Latest Threads

Top