Thread overview | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
August 12, 2005 Needed Keywords for java compatability [throws-instanceof] | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
i know in advance that D is great but as a javanese i [we] need some missing keywords for COMPATABILITY with java i mean throws for checked exceptions and instanceof of checkd typecasting i know i can do everything with D but with a large code i [we] need to transform from java to D it is a tedious work so we NEED these keyword just for COMPATABILITY . ----------------------------------------------- CONSTRUCTOR: i don't know why you choose to make D constructor like this i mean using this keyword as constructor i think it is a bad idea , inconvenient and unreadable for a while i think you also must use the C++/java style for constructor and this FOR COMPATABILITY only. -------------------------------------------------- THANK YOU kortex |
August 12, 2005 Re: Needed Keywords for java compatability [throws-instanceof] | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to kortex | In article <ddig7b$m8m$1@digitaldaemon.com>, kortex says... > >i know in advance that D is great but as a javanese i [we] need some missing keywords for COMPATABILITY with java i mean throws for checked exceptions As a C++ programmer, I think throws clauses are far more trouble than they're worth. Particularly for a language that can call C code which may in turn generate system errors that propagate as exceptions. >and instanceof of checkd typecasting Dynamic typing will improve as D matures. Sean |
August 12, 2005 Re: Needed Keywords for java compatability [throws-instanceof] | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to kortex | kortex wrote: > i know in advance that D is great but as a javanese i [we] need some missing > keywords for COMPATABILITY with java i mean throws for checked exceptions > and instanceof of checkd typecasting > i know i can do everything with D but with a large code i [we] need to transform > from java to D it is a tedious work > so we NEED these keyword just for COMPATABILITY . For what it's worth, I'm a long time Java user and I utterly disagree with you. If D were to add keywords and operators to ease your issues of porting Java projects, where does it end? From how many other languages should keywords be added? While I would love to see some particular Java features implemented in D (reflection, introspection, dynamic instantiation), I don't expect them to be implemented the 'Java way'. Think of it this way, if you move to D permanently you only need to port the project once. > ----------------------------------------------- CONSTRUCTOR: > i don't know why you choose to make D constructor like this i mean using this keyword as constructor i think it is a bad idea , inconvenient and unreadable for a while > i think you also must use the C++/java style for constructor > and this FOR COMPATABILITY only. > -------------------------------------------------- D is not Java. D is not C++. The reason it seems foreign to you is that you are not 'Thinking in D'. Once you've worked with D for a while, this() as a constructor becomes quite natural. And contrary to your difficulties, I now find it much more readable than having constructors named after the class - this() just jumps out immediately and screems 'I'm a constructor!' because it's identical for every class. Maybe it will do the same for you over time. |
August 12, 2005 Re: Needed Keywords for java compatability [throws-instanceof] | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Mike Parker |
Mr. Parker I was about to say almost the same as You did.
I, as C++ user, could (acually i would not - but just for an example :)
require *_cast , throws, using (...) keywords; Modula-3 developers would
require lock, thread, unsafe ; C# developers would require something else...
Kind regards
Dejan
--
...........
Dejan Lekic
http://dejan.lekic.org
|
August 12, 2005 Re: Needed Keywords for java compatability [throws-instanceof] | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to kortex | kortex wrote:
> and instanceof of checkd typecasting
Already can be done, using cast().
# // Java
# if (obj instanceof Foo)
# // ...
# // D
# if (cast(Foo)obj !is null)
# // ...
-- Chris Sauls
|
August 12, 2005 Re: Needed Keywords for java compatability [throws-instanceof] | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to kortex | On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 17:45:47 +0200, kortex <kortex_member@pathlink.com> wrote: > so we NEED these keyword just for COMPATABILITY . I dare to say, that java needs to drop this keywords for compatibility with D. Not reverse. Ha! :> ;) -- Dawid Ciężarkiewicz |
August 12, 2005 Re: Needed Keywords for java compatability [throws-instanceof] | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Dawid Ciężarkiewicz | In article <op.svewd2yo58xlqs@localhost.localdomain>, =?utf-8?B?RGF3aWQgQ2nEmcW8YXJraWV3aWN6?= says... > >On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 17:45:47 +0200, kortex <kortex_member@pathlink.com> wrote: > >> so we NEED these keyword just for COMPATABILITY . > >I dare to say, that java needs to drop this keywords for compatibility with D. Not reverse. Ha! :> ;) I second this notion and propose, furthermore, that the language Java be known henceforth as D--. Sun? --AJG. |
August 12, 2005 Re: Needed Keywords for java compatability [throws-instanceof] | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to AJG | AJG wrote:
> In article <op.svewd2yo58xlqs@localhost.localdomain>,
> =?utf-8?B?RGF3aWQgQ2nEmcW8YXJraWV3aWN6?= says...
>
>>On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 17:45:47 +0200, kortex <kortex_member@pathlink.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>so we NEED these keyword just for COMPATABILITY .
>>
>>I dare to say, that java needs to drop this keywords for compatibility with D. Not reverse. Ha! :> ;)
>
>
> I second this notion and propose, furthermore, that the language Java be known
> henceforth as D--. Sun?
>
> --AJG.
>
>
D--
LOL!
You have a point there, we must deal with other languages from a position of strength.
|
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation