On Sun, 6 Jan 2002 11:26, Steve Downey wrote: > Your javac has a configuration setting for the class names of inner > classes? Although the inner classes use a $ embedded, rather than as a lead > character. It's a similar issue.
And whats that got to do with the price of fish? $ is not valid in identifiers in java language (but fine in .class file format). > The recommendation in C that _ is reserved for the implementor is not a > linker issue, but more of a namespace scoping issue. errr .... go have a look at the evolution of c/linkers and the pains some people went through re different linker/header file combos. > There isn't a good way > of marking a function as to be used by the implementor or the compiler, in > such a way that a programmer can not conflict with it. Java has private > which accomplishes that. private is an access marker - it does not define any metatype. Java has a crap metadata infrastructure - thats one of the things that C# did far better than java. Its a feature people have been asking for since 1.0 days but sun keeps dropping the ball or implementing workarounds. > But reserving some characters for the implementors is not really a bad > thing. Sure it is - it makes it acceptable for them to write poor code. -- Cheers, Pete "The perfect way is only difficult for those who pick and choose. Do not like, do not dislike; all will then be clear. Make a hairbreadth difference and heaven and earth are set apart; if you want the truth to stand clear before you, never be for or against." - Bruce Lee -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
