| Re: OOP versus Procedural/Functional [message #177634 is a reply to message #177631] |
Wed, 11 April 2012 20:24   |
Jerry Stuckle
Messages: 2598
Registered: September 2010
Karma:
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 4/11/2012 1:18 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <jm4dnm$cj7$1(at)dont-email(dot)me>,
> Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex(at)attglobal(dot)net> wrote:
>
>> On 4/11/2012 10:25 AM, Goran wrote:
>>> On 11.4.2012 13:16, crankypuss wrote:
>>>> I remember writing a Java application and trying to derive an actually
>>>> useful string class from the garbage they had declared "final" and
>> that
>>>> was it for me and Java.
>>>
>>> Just for curiosity, which method you tried to override? Somehow i smell
>>> a good reason for "final" :)
>>
>> Actually, I agree with Cranky on this one. I, too, have wanted to
>> override the java String class and been frustrated by its 'final'
>> attribute. I don't see why it couldn't have been created as non-final
>> - and it would have been a lot more usable.
>
> Somehow this reminds me of one of the Pascal pig's ears: that two
> strings of different lengths were different types.
>
LOL. Yes, Pascal takes strict typing (more than) a bit too far. And
for that very reason I think it's a good training language - but a
crappy development language.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex(at)attglobal(dot)net
==================
|
|
|
|
Calendar
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
]