Dive Into Java?
usenet-mail-0306.20.chr0n0ss at spamgourmet.com
Wed Oct 11 23:38:58 CEST 2006
Diez B. Roggisch wrote:
> You don't seem to understand what is happening here. The fact that
> string literals in java exist has nothing to do with an implicit
> type casting as above example shows.
Whoops. "10", arg and _arg /are/ integers, right?
> C++ was new, nobody forced them to keep pointers around.
For compatibility reasons to C it seems quite necessary.
[interface compatibility to String]
> That isn't possible with python, too.
No? Mh, perhaps it's too late for my brain tonight ;)
> Python has those clunky rules as well as C++ - or don't you write
> character literals like
> in C++ as well? Where exactly is that clunky?
IMHO, that only for String class
String spam = "eggs";
works (in Java).
> But choices let you make more errors - which was my point from the
> beginning: java is a limited language, and I don't like it too
> much. But it makes it hard to do things wrong. C++ makes it hard
> to make them right.
I agree. *If* one is an absolute beginner with programming. C++ may
have too many weird options in places where Java has one possible
BOFH excuse #364:
Sand fleas eating the Internet cables
More information about the Python-list