 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Em 03/04/2012 05:17, Invisible escreveu:
>>> It's interesting, actually. I needed a parser. Since Java doesn't have
>>> any parsing libraries
>>
>> LOL
>
> What I obviously /meant/ was that it doesn't come with one
> out-of-the-box. Sheesh...
well, neither is parsec. Still, you didn't go on writing your own, did
you? :p
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>>> It's interesting, actually. I needed a parser. Since Java doesn't have
>>>> any parsing libraries
>>>
>>> LOL
>>
>> What I obviously /meant/ was that it doesn't come with one
>> out-of-the-box. Sheesh...
>
> well, neither is parsec. Still, you didn't go on writing your own, did
> you? :p
When you install Haskell, Parsec /is/ included in the default install.
(Unless you go with one of the more obscure Haskell implementations.)
When you install the normal JDK bundle, it doesn't include a parsing
library.
OTOH, when you install Haskell, you don't get any GUI capabilities, but
with the JDK you do. They just come with different sets of libraries,
that's all.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 02/04/2012 10:07 AM, Invisible wrote:
> Just like in the old days, things are still a bit buggy.
Wait - you implemented generics but didn't implement generic array
creation??!
*facepalm*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gotta love the way NetBeans displays stdout and stderr in different
colours, but the two streams don't actually line up!
(For example, if the program throws an exception, the exception text
appears a couple of lines /above/ the line of output where the exception
was actually thrown...)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/3/2012 6:41, Invisible wrote:
> When you install the normal JDK bundle, it doesn't include a parsing library.
Now, grasshopper, do you understand why every configuration file everywhere
in any Java-based system is based on XML or property files?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 06/04/2012 03:12 AM, Darren New wrote:
> On 4/3/2012 6:41, Invisible wrote:
>> When you install the normal JDK bundle, it doesn't include a parsing
>> library.
>
> Now, grasshopper, do you understand why every configuration file
> everywhere in any Java-based system is based on XML or property files?
Oh, well, that's almost an /advantage/. Why invent yet another file
format when you can use an existing well-supported one?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/6/2012 2:02, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> On 06/04/2012 03:12 AM, Darren New wrote:
>> On 4/3/2012 6:41, Invisible wrote:
>>> When you install the normal JDK bundle, it doesn't include a parsing
>>> library.
>>
>> Now, grasshopper, do you understand why every configuration file
>> everywhere in any Java-based system is based on XML or property files?
>
> Oh, well, that's almost an /advantage/. Why invent yet another file format
> when you can use an existing well-supported one?
Because XML sucks for that purpose, because it was never designed for that
purpose.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> Now, grasshopper, do you understand why every configuration file
>>> everywhere in any Java-based system is based on XML or property files?
>>
>> Oh, well, that's almost an /advantage/. Why invent yet another file
>> format
>> when you can use an existing well-supported one?
>
> Because XML sucks for that purpose, because it was never designed for
> that purpose.
So what would you use?
Personally, I'm somewhat partial to JSON. Unfortunately, the rest of the
world seems to like the horrifyingly awful YAML...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I almost feel like I'm going mad. I'm trying to use the NetBeans
debugger, and... well... it doesn't appear to /work/.
I'm single-stepping through the code, and half the time the local
variables window doesn't even remotely correspond to the code I'm
actually looking at. I step over a line that says id++, and the id field
remains stubbornly fixed at its previous value. Even though I just
god-damn /watched/ the increment instruction execute! WTF?!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/7/2012 11:01, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> So what would you use?
I would use something specific to what I'm configuring, if possible. I don't
want my makefiles, my database schema, my network packet layout, and my
description of my UI to all be written in the same language.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
