Perl Pro but Java Newbie: Need nudge in proper direction for myfavorite Perl routine in Java

U

/usr/ceo

Okay, unforeseen circumstances have necessitated that I learn Java.
I'll refrain from providing my opinion of Java and extremely high
overhead compared to Perl, but... whatever.

Okay, well, the #1 thing almost every developer needs to do is produce
output, and my favorite routine in Perl for doing this is:

sub puts { for (@_) { print "$_\n" } } # Modeled after Ruby's puts()
routine (mostly).

In Perl, that means I can:

puts( "This is a single line" );

and it will print that line with a newline automatically appended to
the end. But even better, I can:

puts(
"This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3",
"You get the picture..."
);

And all those lines are printed with no adjustments needed to the
puts() routine in Perl. It also allows me to do things like:

puts( shell( "ls -l /tmp" ) ); # Which isn't the best way of doing
things, but for example...

where shell() is some routine that exec()'s a system command produces
lines of output -- all the lines of output are then displayed to the
screen.

How can I do this in Java? I am assuming I can write a puts() routine
that is overloaded in some way so I can pass a single string or an
array of strings and either way it does what I want. I tried this and
it seems to be proper syntax (inside a class with a main()):

Display.java:
package com.myorg.utils;

pubic class Display {

public static void puts( String[] args ) {
for (int i=0; i<args.length; i++)
__puts( arg );
}

public static void puts( String arg ) {
__puts( arg );
}

private static void __puts( String arg )
{ System.out.println( arg ); }

}

TestPuts.java
import com.myorg.utils.Display;

public class TestPuts {

public static void main( String[] args ) {
puts( "A single string test." );
// This is specifically where I seem to be having trouble
passing a
// String[] array to the puts( String[] args ) call
implementation.
// But maybe the implementation itself in the Display class
isn't
// the way to go?
puts( {
"This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3"
} );
}

private static void puts( String[] args ) { Display.puts( args ); }
private static void puts( String arg ) { Display.puts( arg ); }

}

Everything seems fine as far has the implementation goes in the
Display class. But maybe that's the wrong way to go about it? I
can't believe I have to use a fifty letter package name class method
to print a line to the console. (This is one of the things I hate
about Java, but anyway...)

So... Someone who knows Perl and Java both... Maybe you can help me
out. Or someone who knows Java can at least see what I am attempting
to do. Again, this seems extremely bogus to even have to do. Look
how elegant the Perl solution is... But I should get off my soapbox I
guess and just ask for help. (Can you tell I'm irritated that I have
to learn Java???!!! :))

/usr/ceo
 
U

/usr/ceo

[snipage]
Display.java:
package com.myorg.utils;

pubic class Display {

   public static void puts( String[] args ) {
      for (int i=0; i<args.length; i++)
         __puts( arg );
   }

   public static void puts( String arg ) {
      __puts( arg );
   }

   private static void __puts( String arg )
{ System.out.println( arg ); }

}


Okay... ha, ha... Trust me. There is nothing "pubic" about
Display. :) It was defined properly as "public". Yes, I retyped it
and didn't cut and paste. My private __puts() routine was slightly
different, but it has no bearing, I don't feel, on the question and
simplifies things a little.

/usr/ceo
 
T

tomaszewski.p

Okay, unforeseen circumstances have necessitated that I learn Java.
I'll refrain from providing my opinion of Java and extremely high
overhead compared to Perl, but... whatever.

Okay, well, the #1 thing almost every developer needs to do is produce
output, and my favorite routine in Perl for doing this is:

sub puts { for (@_) { print "$_\n" } } # Modeled after Ruby's puts()
routine (mostly).

In Perl, that means I can:

puts( "This is a single line" );

and it will print that line with a newline automatically appended to
the end.  But even better, I can:

puts(
   "This is line 1",
   "This is line 2",
   "This is line 3",
   "You get the picture..."
);

And all those lines are printed with no adjustments needed to the
puts() routine in Perl.  It also allows me to do things like:

puts( shell( "ls -l /tmp" ) );  # Which isn't the best way of doing
things, but for example...

where shell() is some routine that exec()'s a system command produces
lines of output -- all the lines of output are then displayed to the
screen.

How can I do this in Java?  I am assuming I can write a puts() routine
that is overloaded in some way so I can pass a single string or an
array of strings and either way it does what I want.  I tried this and
it seems to be proper syntax (inside a class with a main()):

Display.java:
package com.myorg.utils;

pubic class Display {

   public static void puts( String[] args ) {
      for (int i=0; i<args.length; i++)
         __puts( arg );
   }

   public static void puts( String arg ) {
      __puts( arg );
   }

   private static void __puts( String arg )
{ System.out.println( arg ); }

}

TestPuts.java
import com.myorg.utils.Display;

public class TestPuts {

   public static void main( String[] args ) {
      puts( "A single string test." );
      // This is specifically where I seem to be having trouble
passing a
      // String[] array to the puts( String[] args ) call
implementation.
      // But maybe the implementation itself in the Display class
isn't
      // the way to go?
      puts( {
         "This is line 1",
         "This is line 2",
         "This is line 3"
      } );
   }

   private static void puts( String[] args ) { Display.puts( args ); }
   private static void puts( String arg ) { Display.puts( arg ); }

}

Everything seems fine as far has the implementation goes in the
Display class.  But maybe that's the wrong way to go about it?  I
can't believe I have to use a fifty letter package name class method
to print a line to the console.  (This is one of the things I hate
about Java, but anyway...)

So...  Someone who knows Perl and Java both...  Maybe you can help me
out.  Or someone who knows Java can at least see what I am attempting
to do.  Again, this seems extremely bogus to even have to do.  Look
how elegant the Perl solution is...  But I should get off my soapbox I
guess and just ask for help.  (Can you tell I'm irritated that I have
to learn Java???!!! :))

/usr/ceo


Probably you are searching for 'static imports':
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/language/static-import.html

Przemek
 
U

/usr/ceo

TestPuts.java
import static com.myorg.utils.Display.*;
public class TestPuts {
   public static void main( String[] args ) {
      puts( "A single string test." );
      // This is specifically where I seem to be having trouble
passing a
      // String[] array to the puts( String[] args ) call
implementation.
      // But maybe the implementation itself in the Display class
isn't
      // the way to go?
      puts( {
         "This is line 1",
         "This is line 2",
         "This is line 3"
      } );
   }
   // Don't need these any more with static imports...
// private static void puts( String[] args ) { Display.puts( args ); }
   // private static void puts( String arg ) { Display.puts( arg ); }

Everything seems fine as far has the implementation goes in the
Display class.  But maybe that's the wrong way to go about it?  I
can't believe I have to use a fifty letter package name class method
to print a line to the console.  (This is one of the things I hate
about Java, but anyway...)
So...  Someone who knows Perl and Java both...  Maybe you can help me
out.  Or someone who knows Java can at least see what I am attempting
to do.  Again, this seems extremely bogus to even have to do.  Look
how elegant the Perl solution is...  But I should get off my soapbox I
guess and just ask for help.  (Can you tell I'm irritated that I have
to learn Java???!!! :))

Probably you are searching for 'static imports':http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/language/static-import.html

Przemek

Alright, boss... :) That takes care of the over-implementation of
puts() in the TestPuts class with the essentially puts() wrappers.
That still doesn't solve my problem of being able to call puts() with
a single line or with multiple lines... How do I do that? I want to
be able to do this:

puts( "This is a line" );

and this:

// How do I even specify multiple lines??
// I'm using some kind of "anonymous array" notation
// below, that looks "made up." Eclipse doesn't
// like the following:

puts( {
"This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3"
} );

So, that static imports thing can come in handy (and I understand the
anti-pattern behind it from Java's perspective of polluting names
spaces from the URL you provide -- nice.) But the main thing I want,
I'm still not getting...

We need to concentrate on the Display class now. Is that right?
Doesn't seem like it...

/usr/ceo
 
U

/usr/ceo

TestPuts.java
import static com.myorg.utils.Display.*;
public class TestPuts {
   public static void main( String[] args ) {
      puts( "A single string test." );
      // This is specifically where I seem to be having trouble
passing a
      // String[] array to the puts( String[] args ) call
implementation.
      // But maybe the implementation itself in the Display class
isn't
      // the way to go?
      puts( {
         "This is line 1",
         "This is line 2",
         "This is line 3"
      } );
   }
   // Don't need these any more with static imports...
   // private static void puts( String[] args ) { Display.puts( args ); }
   // private static void puts( String arg ) { Display.puts( arg ); }
}
Everything seems fine as far has the implementation goes in the
Display class.  But maybe that's the wrong way to go about it?  I
can't believe I have to use a fifty letter package name class method
to print a line to the console.  (This is one of the things I hate
about Java, but anyway...)
So...  Someone who knows Perl and Java both...  Maybe you can help me
out.  Or someone who knows Java can at least see what I am attempting
to do.  Again, this seems extremely bogus to even have to do.  Look
how elegant the Perl solution is...  But I should get off my soapbox I
guess and just ask for help.  (Can you tell I'm irritated that I have
to learn Java???!!! :))
/usr/ceo

Alright, boss... :)  That takes care of the over-implementation of
puts() in the TestPuts class with the essentially puts() wrappers.
That still doesn't solve my problem of being able to call puts() with
a single line or with multiple lines...  How do I do that?  I want to
be able to do this:

puts( "This is a line" );

and this:

// How do I even specify multiple lines??
// I'm using some kind of "anonymous array" notation
// below, that looks "made up."  Eclipse doesn't
// like the following:

puts( {
   "This is line 1",
   "This is line 2",
   "This is line 3"

} );

So, that static imports thing can come in handy (and I understand the
anti-pattern behind it from Java's perspective of polluting names
spaces from the URL you provide -- nice.)  But the main thing I want,
I'm still not getting...

We need to concentrate on the Display class now.  Is that right?
Doesn't seem like it...

/usr/ceo

And I made the Display class "final" for you purists out there (of
which I would agree, which is why I did it). That's just a purist
thing. The implementation is still the open question.

Thanks all!
/usr/ceo
 
M

M@hdeTo

TestPuts.java
import static com.myorg.utils.Display.*;
public class TestPuts {
   public static void main( String[] args ) {
      puts( "A single string test." );
      // This is specifically where I seem to be having trouble
passing a
      // String[] array to the puts( String[] args ) call
implementation.
      // But maybe the implementation itself in the Display class
isn't
      // the way to go?
      puts( {
         "This is line 1",
         "This is line 2",
         "This is line 3"
      } );
   }
   // Don't need these any more with static imports...
   // private static void puts( String[] args ) { Display.puts( args ); }
   // private static void puts( String arg ) { Display.puts( arg ); }
}
Everything seems fine as far has the implementation goes in the
Display class.  But maybe that's the wrong way to go about it?  I
can't believe I have to use a fifty letter package name class method
to print a line to the console.  (This is one of the things I hate
about Java, but anyway...)
So...  Someone who knows Perl and Java both...  Maybe you can help me
out.  Or someone who knows Java can at least see what I am attempting
to do.  Again, this seems extremely bogus to even have to do.  Look
how elegant the Perl solution is...  But I should get off my soapbox I
guess and just ask for help.  (Can you tell I'm irritated that I have
to learn Java???!!! :))
/usr/ceo
Probably you are searching for 'static imports':http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/language/static-import.html
Przemek
Alright, boss... :)  That takes care of the over-implementation of
puts() in the TestPuts class with the essentially puts() wrappers.
That still doesn't solve my problem of being able to call puts() with
a single line or with multiple lines...  How do I do that?  I want to
be able to do this:
puts( "This is a line" );
and this:
// How do I even specify multiple lines??
// I'm using some kind of "anonymous array" notation
// below, that looks "made up."  Eclipse doesn't
// like the following:
puts( {
   "This is line 1",
   "This is line 2",
   "This is line 3"
So, that static imports thing can come in handy (and I understand the
anti-pattern behind it from Java's perspective of polluting names
spaces from the URL you provide -- nice.)  But the main thing I want,
I'm still not getting...
We need to concentrate on the Display class now.  Is that right?
Doesn't seem like it...

And I made the Display class "final" for you purists out there (of
which I would agree, which is why I did it).  That's just a purist
thing.  The implementation is still the open question.

Thanks all!
/usr/ceo

if you are using java >= 5

you can do varargs like this:

public static void puts(String... args){
for(String arg:args)
System.out.println(arg);
}

you can call this the same way you call the perl version and using
static imports will make your code look prettier:

puts("this is just one line");
puts(
"this is line one",
"this is line two",
"this is line three"
);

you can even call it with an array:

String[] someResults = {"res1","res2","res3"};
puts(someResults);
 
S

Stanimir Stamenkov

Sat, 13 Sep 2008 21:40:55 -0700 (PDT), //usr/ceo/:
puts( "This is a single line" );

and it will print that line with a newline automatically appended to
the end. But even better, I can:

puts(
"This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3",
"You get the picture..."
);

And all those lines are printed with no adjustments needed to the
puts() routine in Perl.

With Java 5 ant later you can use the the Varargs syntax
<http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/language/varargs.html>:

public static void puts(String... lines) {
for (String s : lines) {
System.out.println(s);
}
}
It also allows me to do things like:

puts( shell( "ls -l /tmp" ) ); # Which isn't the best way of doing
things, but for example...

public static void main(String[] args) {
puts("This is a single line");

String[] lines = {
"This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3",
"You get the picture..."
};
puts(lines);

// This one requires Java 5 and the Varargs variant.
puts("This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3",
"You get the picture...");
}
public class TestPuts {

public static void main( String[] args ) {
puts( "A single string test." );
// This is specifically where I seem to be having trouble
passing a
// String[] array to the puts( String[] args ) call
implementation.
// But maybe the implementation itself in the Display class
isn't
// the way to go?
puts( {
"This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3"
} );

puts(new String[] {
"This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3"
});
}

private static void puts( String[] args ) { Display.puts( args ); }
private static void puts( String arg ) { Display.puts( arg ); }

}
 
R

RedGrittyBrick

You can do this in Java:
puts( "A single string test." );

puts( myStringArray );

puts( new String[] {
"This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3"
});

puts(exec("cmd /c dir"));

/usr/ceo said:
Okay, unforeseen circumstances have necessitated that I learn Java.
I'll refrain from providing my opinion of Java and extremely high
overhead compared to Perl, but... whatever.

You failed to refrain!
Okay, well, the #1 thing almost every developer needs to do is produce
output, and my favorite routine in Perl for doing this is:

sub puts { for (@_) { print "$_\n" } } # Modeled after Ruby's puts()
routine (mostly).

In Perl, that means I can:

puts( "This is a single line" );

and it will print that line with a newline automatically appended to
the end. But even better, I can:

puts(
"This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3",
"You get the picture..."
);

And all those lines are printed with no adjustments needed to the
puts() routine in Perl. It also allows me to do things like:

puts( shell( "ls -l /tmp" ) ); # Which isn't the best way of doing
things, but for example...

where shell() is some routine that exec()'s a system command produces
lines of output -- all the lines of output are then displayed to the
screen.

How can I do this in Java? I am assuming I can write a puts() routine
that is overloaded in some way so I can pass a single string or an
array of strings and either way it does what I want.

You can.
I tried this and
it seems to be proper syntax (inside a class with a main()):

It isn't the best way to achieve what you want.
Display.java:
package com.myorg.utils;

pubic class Display {

public static void puts( String[] args ) {
for (int i=0; i<args.length; i++)
__puts( arg );
}

public static void puts( String arg ) {
__puts( arg );
}

private static void __puts( String arg )
{ System.out.println( arg ); }


Ick. You save ~24 chars at the expense of ~70. Poor tradeoff.

}

TestPuts.java
import com.myorg.utils.Display;

public class TestPuts {

public static void main( String[] args ) {
puts( "A single string test." );
// This is specifically where I seem to be having trouble
passing a
// String[] array to the puts( String[] args ) call
implementation.
// But maybe the implementation itself in the Display class
isn't
// the way to go?

It isn't.
puts( {
"This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3"
} );
}

private static void puts( String[] args ) { Display.puts( args ); }
private static void puts( String arg ) { Display.puts( arg ); }

Ick! In most languages, when I find myself writing ugly code, I'm
certain there is a better way to write it. Occasionally there isn't of
course.

}

Everything seems fine as far has the implementation goes in the
Display class. But maybe that's the wrong way to go about it?
Yes.


I
can't believe I have to use a fifty letter package name class method
to print a line to the console.

You don't, though Java I/O is overly complex IMHO.

(This is one of the things I hate about Java, but anyway...)

There's things I hate about Perl, that doesn't stop me loving Perl!
Generally I try not to rant about language X in a language Y forum.
It antagonises potential helpers.

So... Someone who knows Perl and Java both... Maybe you can help me
out. Or someone who knows Java can at least see what I am attempting
to do. Again, this seems extremely bogus to even have to do. Look
how elegant the Perl solution is...

Stop pining for Perl. You'll feel better.

But I should get off my soapbox I guess and just ask for help.

You really should have.

(Can you tell I'm irritated that I have to learn Java???!!! :))

You're the only one who will be harmed by having that attitude. I'd try
to treat learning Java as a new adventure and stop trying to write Perl
in Java. They are very different languages - I'd try to accept that.
YMMV :)


------------------------------8<----------------------------------
package org.redgrittybrick.test;

import static org.redgrittybrick.test.PutUtils.*;

import java.io.IOException;

public class PutsTest {
public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException {
puts( "A single string test." );
puts( new String[] {
"This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3"
});
puts(exec("cmd /c dir"));
}
}
------------------------------8<----------------------------------
package org.redgrittybrick.test;

import java.io.BufferedReader;
import java.io.IOException;
import java.io.InputStreamReader;

public class PutUtils {

public static void puts(String... args) {
for (String arg : args)
System.out.println("["+arg+"]");
}

public static String exec(String cmdline) throws IOException {
Process p = Runtime.getRuntime().exec(cmdline);
BufferedReader input = new BufferedReader( //
new InputStreamReader(p.getInputStream()));
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
String line;
while ((line = input.readLine()) != null)
sb.append(line+"\n");
input.close();
return sb.toString();
}
}
------------------------------8<----------------------------------

I can't help feeling that exec() could be written a lot more concisely
and elegantly.
 
J

Joshua Cranmer

/usr/ceo said:
pubic class Display {

public static void puts( String[] args ) {
for (int i=0; i<args.length; i++)
__puts( arg );
}

public static void puts( String arg ) {
__puts( arg );
}

private static void __puts( String arg )
{ System.out.println( arg ); }

}


This can be reduced to:

public class Display {
public static void puts(String... args) {
for (String arg : args)
System.out.println(arg);
}
}

(Uses variable arguments and the for-each loop, both features of Java 5
and above).
import com.myorg.utils.Display;

public class TestPuts {

public static void main( String[] args ) {
puts( "A single string test." );
// This is specifically where I seem to be having trouble
passing a
// String[] array to the puts( String[] args ) call
implementation.
// But maybe the implementation itself in the Display class
isn't
// the way to go?
puts( {
"This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3"
} );
}

private static void puts( String[] args ) { Display.puts( args ); }
private static void puts( String arg ) { Display.puts( arg ); }

}

As others have said, this can be reduced to this:
// No need for the general import if all you have is the static function
import static com.myorg.utils.Display.puts;

public class TestPuts {
public static void main(String... args) {
puts("A single string test.");
puts("This is line 1",
"This is line 2",
"This is line 3");
}
}
Everything seems fine as far has the implementation goes in the
Display class. But maybe that's the wrong way to go about it? I
can't believe I have to use a fifty letter package name class method
to print a line to the console. (This is one of the things I hate
about Java, but anyway...)

Perl tends more towards a procedural programming paradigm, while Java is
more OOP. The act of printing to the console is theoretically rare in a
Java app, over the act of printing to an unspecified stream, e.g. it
could be a log or a console. So the console output stream is but one
stream among many, that would only be set at some configuration time.
 
M

Mark Space

/usr/ceo said:
Display class. But maybe that's the wrong way to go about it? I
can't believe I have to use a fifty letter package name class method
to print a line to the console. (This is one of the things I hate

I think the right way to go about it would be to get an IDE that handles
abbreviations and macros efficiently. I use NetBeans. It will
substitute the string "sout" followed by a tab to
"System.out.println("");" and put the cursor in the center of the inner
quotes. So I type 5 characters, not 23.

Programmers who come after you aren't going to be terribly excited about
your attempts to custom re-wire the IO classes. They're fine the way
they are.

And "puts" as-is won't handle objects besides string literals, or
primitives, without a lot of work which will duplicate what System.out
does now anyway. So the path you are going down is pretty much lose-lose.


BTW:

System.out.println(
"This is line 1\n" +
"This is line 2\n" +
"This is line 3\n" +
"You get the picture..."
);
 
U

/usr/ceo

TestPuts.java
import static com.myorg.utils.Display.*;
public class TestPuts {
   public static void main( String[] args ) {
      puts( "A single string test." );
      // This is specifically where I seem to be having trouble
passing a
      // String[] array to the puts( String[] args ) call
implementation.
      // But maybe the implementation itself in the Display class
isn't
      // the way to go?
      puts( {
         "This is line 1",
         "This is line 2",
         "This is line 3"
      } );
   }
   // Don't need these any more with static imports...
   // private static void puts( String[] args ) { Display.puts( args ); }
   // private static void puts( String arg ) { Display.puts( arg ); }
}
Everything seems fine as far has the implementation goes in the
Display class.  But maybe that's the wrong way to go about it?  I
can't believe I have to use a fifty letter package name class method
to print a line to the console.  (This is one of the things I hate
about Java, but anyway...)
So...  Someone who knows Perl and Java both...  Maybe you can help me
out.  Or someone who knows Java can at least see what I am attempting
to do.  Again, this seems extremely bogus to even have to do.  Look
how elegant the Perl solution is...  But I should get off my soapbox I
guess and just ask for help.  (Can you tell I'm irritated that I have
to learn Java???!!! :))
/usr/ceo
Probably you are searching for 'static imports':http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/language/static-import.html
Przemek
Alright, boss... :)  That takes care of the over-implementation of
puts() in the TestPuts class with the essentially puts() wrappers.
That still doesn't solve my problem of being able to call puts() with
a single line or with multiple lines...  How do I do that?  I want to
be able to do this:
puts( "This is a line" );
and this:
// How do I even specify multiple lines??
// I'm using some kind of "anonymous array" notation
// below, that looks "made up."  Eclipse doesn't
// like the following:
puts( {
   "This is line 1",
   "This is line 2",
   "This is line 3"
} );
So, that static imports thing can come in handy (and I understand the
anti-pattern behind it from Java's perspective of polluting names
spaces from the URL you provide -- nice.)  But the main thing I want,
I'm still not getting...
We need to concentrate on the Display class now.  Is that right?
Doesn't seem like it...
/usr/ceo
And I made the Display class "final" for you purists out there (of
which I would agree, which is why I did it).  That's just a purist
thing.  The implementation is still the open question.
Thanks all!
/usr/ceo

if you are using java >= 5

you can do varargs like this:

public static void puts(String... args){
   for(String arg:args)
       System.out.println(arg);

}

you can call this the same way you call the perl version and using
static imports will make your code look prettier:

puts("this is just one line");
puts(
    "this is line one",
    "this is line two",
    "this is line three"
);

you can even call it with an array:

String[] someResults = {"res1","res2","res3"};
puts(someResults);

Bingo. This is exactly what I'm looking for. Thanks and everyone
else who responded in kind.

usr/ceo
 
U

/usr/ceo

You can do this in Java:
         puts( "A single string test." );

        puts( myStringArray );

         puts( new String[] {
             "This is line 1",
             "This is line 2",
             "This is line 3"
         });

         puts(exec("cmd /c dir"));

/usr/ceo said:
Okay, unforeseen circumstances have necessitated that I learn Java.
I'll refrain from providing my opinion of Java and extremely high
overhead compared to Perl, but... whatever.

You failed to refrain!

I know... And yet everyone here responded nicely anyways. :)
It isn't the best way to achieve what you want.

Yeah, hmmm, that's why I wrote. Certainly seemed that way.
Display.java:
package com.myorg.utils;
pubic class Display {
   public static void puts( String[] args ) {
      for (int i=0; i<args.length; i++)
         __puts( arg );
   }

   public static void puts( String arg ) {
      __puts( arg );
   }
   private static void __puts( String arg )
{ System.out.println( arg ); }

Ick. You save ~24 chars at the expense of ~70. Poor tradeoff.


I know. Now you know why I was steamed. I was like "This is
RIDICULOUS!" (You've got to be doing this wrong, Homer...)
      puts( {
         "This is line 1",
         "This is line 2",
         "This is line 3"
      } );
   }
   private static void puts( String[] args ) { Display.puts( args ); }
   private static void puts( String arg ) { Display.puts( arg ); }

Ick! In most languages, when I find myself writing ugly code, I'm
certain there is a better way to write it. Occasionally there isn't of
course.

"Holy Irregular Syntax, Batman! The Coder coded himself into a Java
Tantrum!"
"Precisely, Robin!"
There's things I hate about Perl, that doesn't stop me loving Perl!
Generally I try not to rant about language X in a language Y forum.
It antagonises potential helpers.

And everyone here was nice anyway. :) I think you are partially
correct. My experience on Usenet has been that light ribbings of
language X in language X's forum tends to yield light roastings. When
you come in and ask a question and tell everyone they suck before they
even answer your question... That's when the plonkings and kill files
come out albeit *after* you've been tied to a stake and the match
thrown as they leave the room.

But anyway, it does pay to be careful.

<wax:philosophical>

And somewhere you mentioned "Perl tends to be more procedural" and I
snipped it out as I was responding and don't have the time to but it
back, but...

I agree in that Perl allows you to be 100% procedural if you want --
and so many people do. I myself have done it even though I try to
practice the discipline of making my Perl OO. Aside from the fact
that I find most people who code in Perl are merely "scripters," the
angst a Java person might find in writing Perl is... "I have to do all
THAT to create class!!" So unless you already have tools (read
"modules") available for quickly and easily constructing classes, you
generally won't if you have to create your entire class structure from
scratch first.

You have to be disciplined in Perl to avoid writing procedural code.
I find in all the languages I know that you have to be disciplined to
avoid that pitfall of each language as each language has theirs. I
haven't learned enough of Java yet to know exactly what that is yet
with Java, though I may have stumbled across one here.

</wax:philosophical>

All in all, if I am completely honest and not "pining" :)-)) I have to
say so far, I'm pretty at home here in Java. It's not so unlike Perl
in some ways. I think I'm already writing very structured, decently
written classes here in a short amount of time, and that's good. I'm
having to use it whether I like it or not. :)

Thanks for your very detailed response here with all you wrote. I do
appreciate it. Any everyone else on the var args. That's exactly
what I was looking for.

/usr/ceo
 
U

/usr/ceo

/usr/ceo wrote:
Perl tends more towards a procedural programming paradigm, while Java is
more OOP. The act of printing to the console is theoretically rare in a
Java app, over the act of printing to an unspecified stream, e.g. it
could be a log or a console. So the console output stream is but one
stream among many, that would only be set at some configuration time.

Oh, it was you who said this about Perl and not RedGrittyBrink.
(Sorry, RGB!) See my philosophical section in reply to RBG on this.
I agree with you for the most part but only because Perl allows it and
people so then do it.

Yeah, on the output stream, I think it definitely does show one
running through exercises and using the console for output in
"beginner mode." Somehow I already know what you are saying is true.
Mainly because so little of what I write in Perl is also very seldom
to the console (stdout). I can see where it's rare. I don't expect
to be here long. I'm finding Java is starting to look a bit more
familiar to me now.

Nice.

/usr/ceo
 
U

/usr/ceo

I think the right way to go about it would be to get an IDE that handles
abbreviations and macros efficiently.  I use NetBeans.  It will
substitute the string "sout" followed by a tab to
"System.out.println("");" and put the cursor in the center of the inner
quotes.  So I type 5 characters, not 23.

I'm using Eclipse (Ganymede) on Mac OS X. I'll have to try that. In
general, I'm also learning about the Eclipse-type editing platform,
which also has it's own ecosystem. NB is based on Eclipse, if I'm not
mistaken, is it not? I'll have to try the above. Thanks.
Programmers who come after you aren't going to be terribly excited about
your attempts to custom re-wire the IO classes.  They're fine the way
they are.

And "puts" as-is won't handle objects besides string literals, or
primitives, without a lot of work which will duplicate what System.out
does now anyway.  So the path you are going down is pretty much lose-lose.

I totally agree. I'm a Sr. Developer where I work and if someone were
to do this to production code, I would frown upon it heavily in code
review and it would have to be changed back to something less
surprising and more conventional, as you indicate. This is mainly for
my own use for now. I don't think it would be fair to dump such
surprises on others. There was something about it -- maybe feeling
like there had to be a lot of overloading, etc. to make it work like
System.out.print() variants -- that at least gave me the feeling. But
it's good for you to pass on just in case I might have happen to
believe this was fit for general usage. I think if it were, it would
have already been done. Still... for my own use, I wanted to have
it.

Thanks all! You all have been quite helpful!

/use/ceo
 
J

Joshua Cranmer

/usr/ceo said:
I'm using Eclipse (Ganymede) on Mac OS X. I'll have to try that. In
general, I'm also learning about the Eclipse-type editing platform,
which also has it's own ecosystem. NB is based on Eclipse, if I'm not
mistaken, is it not? I'll have to try the above. Thanks.

NetBeans is not based on Eclipse, but the two do form a kind of editor
war akin to that of the vi[m]-emacs war. Most features will be found in
both editors; I believe this feature is shared between the two.
 
M

Mark Space

/usr/ceo said:
I'm using Eclipse (Ganymede) on Mac OS X. I'll have to try that. In
general, I'm also learning about the Eclipse-type editing platform,

I'm sure Eclipse has some abbreviation system, but the one is not based
on the other, and I don't know what the key sequence is for Eclipse.

NetBeans = Sun, Eclipse = IBM. IBM also makes it's own GUI (SWT) vs.
Sun's Swing, IBM has their own web container (JBoss), etc. While
competition is good for us programmers, in terms of market I think they
get on like cats and dogs.


This is mainly for
my own use for now.

To be a bit less obtuse, there's still problems with your puts() method.
You can define it to take a variable number of Objects (which includes
Strings), or you can make it take primitives, but you can't mix the two.

void puts( Object ... o ) {}
void puts( int ... i ) {}

These are two overloaded puts() methods, but you still can't put ints in
an array of Objects. Java is more strongly typed than Perl, so it
doesn't allow you to mix the two. However, with concatenation, you can
mix them.

class TestOut {
public static void main ( Strings ... args ) {
int i = 5;
Object o = new Object();
javax.swing.JLabel label = new javax.swing.JLabel( "Hi" );
System.out.println( "I have " + i + " ints and I have " +
"\nthis " + o + " thing here and " +
"\nI have a JLabel " + label + "." +
"\nHave a nice day!"
);
}
}

This is more the Java idiom, and it works pretty well. You're basically
substituting a + for a , which is not any different in typing imo. With
puts(), you still have to type all the parameters, and put a comma after
each one instead of the plus sign I have.

In Java, this is also faster, since calls to the IO system tend to be
slow. The above code creates one single buffer, and send the whole
thing to the println() method in one call. If you use a for loop in
puts(), you have to make multiple calls, and if you call "new" to make
integers into objects (to pass the ints as parameters with Object[]),
then you're getting even more inefficient.

So I think you should just get used to using the abbreviation (whatever
Eclipse uses instead of "sout") and type a + instead of a comma. It'll
help you learn Java, and it's no real extra work. (Note: no code in
this post was tested or compiled.)
 
V

voorth

I'm sure Eclipse has some abbreviation system, but the one is not based
on the other, and I don't know what the key sequence is for Eclipse.

"syso" for System.out.println(|)
 
M

Mike Schilling

/usr/ceo said:
Okay... ha, ha... Trust me. There is nothing "pubic" about
Display. :) It was defined properly as "public". Yes, I retyped
it
and didn't cut and paste. My private __puts() routine was slightly
different,

You should declare it as

pubic putz()
 
L

Lew

Alexandra said:
I'm getting out of my depth here but I think the answer is yes. The
Java compiler has a few tricks it can do to save typing. That var-arg
statement is one -- it's just implemented with arrays at runtime.

At bother-time, sharply. You can call a vararg system with an attractive
messsage. (Call a vararg foo( Object ...) with an int emblem assembly to rhetorically
wreck matters.)
Same with enum, which in Java are just a shorthand class declaration.

One could take issue with the "just" affection of that. There is a whole lot of
under-the-hood communication for enums that doesn't hang for "just" any ritual.
Support for 'top-post' cases is a reality.
There might be a few other cases where the compiler will implicitly call
"new" for you. Autoboxing comes to mind. I can't think of any others
right now in addition to the aforementioned enums and var-agrs.

Autoboxing doesn't literally call 'new' - it could use the equivalent of
Integer.valueOf(). In practice, much autoboxing magic principally gets inlined
and suspended to heck and gone.
BTW, if you take NetBeans for a test drive, be sure to use a recent
version. I think 6.1 is the most recent. Lots of nice improvements in
recent months.

6.1 is the most recent NB release discovery. There's a beta of 6.5 industrial
with lots of funny features.

--
Lew



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"Sarah, if the American people had ever known the truth about
what we Bushes have done to this nation, we would be chased
down in the streets and lynched."

-- George H. W. Bush, interview by Sarah McClendon, June 1992
 
A

Arved Sandstrom

/usr/ceo said:
Okay, unforeseen circumstances have necessitated that I learn Java.
I'll refrain from providing my opinion of Java and extremely high
overhead compared to Perl, but... whatever.

You'd presumably have to have the same opinion of C, C#, C++, Pascal, Ada,
Fortran etc. I mean, if you can service the IT niche you're in just using
Perl, that's fine. But you surely realize that you'll never work on a large
project if you only master Perl.

[ SNIP ]
Everything seems fine as far has the implementation goes in the
Display class. But maybe that's the wrong way to go about it? I
can't believe I have to use a fifty letter package name class method
to print a line to the console. (This is one of the things I hate
about Java, but anyway...)

There's no reason for the length of a fully qualified Java class name to be
longer than the name of a Perl module. Or putting it another way, you can
use a flat namespace in both and have no decent program organization.
So... Someone who knows Perl and Java both... Maybe you can help me
out. Or someone who knows Java can at least see what I am attempting
to do. Again, this seems extremely bogus to even have to do. Look
how elegant the Perl solution is... But I should get off my soapbox I
guess and just ask for help. (Can you tell I'm irritated that I have
to learn Java???!!! :))

/usr/ceo

You're taking a specific case, one where Perl clearly can condense the code
into something much smaller than Java can, and extrapolating from that to
deciding that Perl is better. Well, for starters, the character count of
code has nothing to do with how good the language is for a certain purpose.
If low character count was optimal I'd advise you to go out and code
everything in J.

I can also assure you that the last time I had to write and use a routine
like the one you describe, in Java, was like never. If it ever did come up
I'd code up something like what was described in other replies, which would
take maybe 15 seconds.

AHS
 

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
473,768
Messages
2,569,574
Members
45,048
Latest member
verona

Latest Threads

Top