That's lovely, but doesn't help at all when you inherit code that does it wrong. :)
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Jon Kiparsky <[email protected]>wrote: > "Also, knowing that Integers are objects isn't the problem, it's that == > succeeds sometimes." > > That's for sure. I don't remember who said it, but this is a case of > "syntactic sugar leads to cancer of the semicolon". I still say it's the > programmers job to know the language, and part of that is knowing that > object comparison with == is always wrong, even if the implementers have > made a stupid decision to make it work for some arbitrary values. Really, > it's not a particularly obscure or subtle fact about the language. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
