9u049u89gh89fsdpokofkdpbm34i
+++ Attachment: No Virus found
+++ Bitdefender AntiVirus - www.bitdefender.com
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Where's the advantage of a method pointer?
Maybe Mr. Angus wasn't going here, but behind my
concept was work I have done in C/C++ with arrays
of function-through-pointer for varied functionality
depending on context.
Yes. It was in order to provide much more dynamic variation in behaviour,
Dain wrote:
If you want method pointers today, just get a good byte code generation
tool.
Yeah I know, and I seriously believe that workarounds such as this do more
to harm the so-called purity of Java than providing explicit language
level mechanisms for method pointers.
The AWT moved from
Date: 2004-10-27T06:51:47
Editor: UnicoHommes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wiki: Jakarta Wiki
Page: JakartaPMCTopLevelProjectApplication
URL: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/JakartaPMCTopLevelProjectApplication
Create TLP questionaire by Danny Angus
Change Log:
Date: 2004-10-27T07:12:42
Editor: UnicoHommes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wiki: Jakarta Wiki
Page: JakartaPMCRequestTLPBenchmark
URL: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/JakartaPMCRequestTLPBenchmark
Add TLP questionaire by Danny Angus
New Page:
=== Community dynamic ===
a. Is your
On Oct 27, 2004, at 1:10 AM, Danny Angus wrote:
Dain wrote:
If you want method pointers today, just get a good byte code
generation
tool.
Yeah I know, and I seriously believe that workarounds such as this do
more
to harm the so-called purity of Java than providing explicit language
level
Hello all,
In addressing bug #6229 [1], it transpired that we needed a bounded
hash map using LRU heuristics and identity to compute hashmap and
object references for equality. Basically, it would be a HashMap
merging the qualities of a LRUMap [2] and those of IdentityHashMap [3,
4, 5].
This
The way that most modern languages handle what C used to do with
method-pointers is with closures. Exactly what that means for a language
like Java is being experimented with in places like Groovy. Much like how
entity beans are a joke -- giving all of J2EE a big black eye -- and the
standard is
method pointers? closures?
Is anybody going to suggest self-modifying java assembler code as a
language feature?
Is the goal to break Java and render it useless?
In my opinion we can live without closures.
You didn't have to attach for a bit longer.
Jim Moore wrote:
The way that most modern
How are we deciding on the Java Futures? Are we voting? Just talking?
There are wide ranging views here, from add no more (JDK1.5 was bad enough)
to add everything but the kitchen sink.
The wiki has some simpler ideas which haven't been shouted down yet, like
jar in jar and access to the Class
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
How are we deciding on the Java Futures? Are we voting? Just talking?
Funny you should ask ... :-)
First, the ideas can be discussed on the mailing list, but we should collect
them on the Wiki. Second, we should try to prioritize them. Third, I have
some feedback
What wiki, where? Thanx,
Jack
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 20:08:36 -0400, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First, the ideas can be discussed on the mailing list, but we should collect
them on the Wiki. Second, we should try to prioritize them. Third, I have
some feedback already on the
12 matches
Mail list logo
