>> "For receiving input, use the InputStream classes. For output, use the
>> OutputStream classes."
>>
>> "For receiving input, use the Reader classes. For output, use the Writer
>> classes. The InputStream and OutputStream classes are now formally
>> deprecated. (Even though System.in, System.out and System.err mention
>> them
>> explicitly.)"
>
> And now there's a third set, NIO, or "New I/O". I wonder what they'll
> call the fourth set.

*facepalm*

>> "We will never deprecate the AWT."
>> "The AWT is now deprecated. Please use Swing in new applications."
>
> Yeah, I remember that one.

Was it you that said something about "committing to backwards 
compatibility way too early"?

>> "For structuring complex applications, use the ApplicationFactory class."
>>
>> "The ApplicationFactory class is now deprecated. Please use
>> ApplicationCenter for new."
>>
>> "The ApplicationCenter class is now deprecated. The ApplicationFactory
>> class
>> has been formally UNdeprecated. Please use ApplicationFactory for new
>> applications."
>
> Oh, wait until you use some "dependency injection". Then you'll have
> *no* idea how your code is structured. You not only get the indirection
> of factories making other factories, but the factories you're depending
> on aren't even compiled at the same time as everything else. Good luck
> figuring out what you're trying to instantiate.

It just amuses me that they thought the current design was bad, so they 
deprecated it and build a better replacement. And then they decided the 
repliacement was worse than the original, so they UNdeprecated it. I 
mean, WTF?

>> documentation helpfully fails to say. (E.g., "start() - starts the
>> widget." Yeah, thanks for that. I gathered.)
>
> Yep, yep. Altho MS has been starting to do that sort of crap lately too,
> I've noticed.

I notice Office no longer comes with any documentation at all, just a 
link to an online forum. (So if you have no Internet access, there's no 
documentation AT ALL.) That's a nice touch... Why pay for experts to 
write correct documentation when you can get your users to spread 
erroneous twiddle for free?

> The first release of Java had identical documentation for
> StreamReader and StreamWriter, because they did the cut-and-paste and
> forgot to change "read" to "write" everywhere.

Yep. That's the great thing about embedding documentation in the source 
code; it keeps the two in sync.

Oh, wait...

>> I wonder if they fixed that yet?
>
> Nope.

LOL. At least VisualStudio J++ got that right... (Oh, wait, Sun sued 
Microsoft to make them discontinue that product.)

> I did some code yesterday where I had to break one type name over
> multiple lines to keep within the 80-character line limit standard. It
> doesn't help when you have stuff like
> FastPersistentLinearCollection<OrganizationIndividualRelationshipEntity>
>
> I kid you not.

That's just silly...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message