Best way to halt Java process?
in [Java Programming]
|
Prev: encrypted javamail MimeMultipart
Next: Urgent DIRECT CLIENT Openings: 1.Websphere Portal - Developer, 2.ITIM-TAM Analyst, 3. IT Project Coordinator / Project Analyst
From: Lew on 13 Jun 2010 17:50 Tom Anderson wrote: > Which hinges, really, on recognising that programs are, when you get > down to brass tacks, meaningless, purely mechanical constructs. As they > put it in one of their papers (i forget which): > > Formal logical proofs, and therefore programs - formal logical proofs > that particular computations are possible, expressed in a formal system > called a programming language - are utterly meaningless. To write a > computer program you have to come to terms with this, to accept that > whatever you might want the program to mean, the machine will blindly > follow its meaningless rules and come to some meaningless conclusion. When I took mathematical logic at university way back when, they taught me two aspects of logical system - the formal, mechanical part to which you refer, and the interpretation. The interpretation is a very important part of the use of the system, and likewise therefore with software. There is meaning, and it's the meaning we apply when we translate the formal symbols back to the world of human experience. -- Lew
From: Mike Schilling on 13 Jun 2010 20:49 "Tom Anderson" <twic(a)urchin.earth.li> wrote in message news:alpine.DEB.1.10.1006132156181.16577(a)urchin.earth.li... > On Sat, 12 Jun 2010, Mike Schilling wrote: > >> "Tom Anderson" <twic(a)urchin.earth.li> wrote in message >> news:alpine.DEB.1.10.1006122147520.7429(a)urchin.earth.li... >>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010, ilan wrote: >>> >>>> Lew <noone(a)lewscanon.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> ClassCastException wrote: >>>>>> I think the usual situation will be that a) you don't catch Error and >>>>>> b) >>>>>> servlet containers etc. run servlets etc. in separate threads and >>>>>> deal >>>>>> with it gracefully if any of these threads abends. If you have >>>>>> multiple >>>>>> threads, provide some interrupt mechanism that can be triggered. >>>>> >>>>> <http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/lang/Error.html> >>>>> "An Error is a subclass of Throwable that indicates serious problems >>>>> that a reasonable application should not try to catch." >>>> >>>> Hmmm. I wonder what the definition of _reasonable_ is. >>> >>> I read it as saying "reasonable programs do not catch Errors". It *is* a >>> definition. >> >> It's an odd word to use. A Java program written to test JVM behavior >> might well catch and log Errors. Why is that program unreasonable? > > I think it's fair to say that a program which deliberately causes > fundamental errors is unreasonable. Really? To me, destructive testing is absolutely necessary,
From: Joshua Cranmer on 13 Jun 2010 21:41 On 06/13/2010 04:58 PM, Tom Anderson wrote: > On Sat, 12 Jun 2010, Joshua Cranmer wrote: > >> 6. Most other errors: miscoded server providers. I'm not entirely sure >> why these are errors, but I'm guessing its to force them to be >> propagated to the top-level so that people can fix them. > > Sorry, i have no idea what errors you're talking about here. What do you > mean by 'server'? Could you give a couple of examples? Typo. It's supposed to be "service" providers. -- Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
From: Lew on 13 Jun 2010 21:45 Tom Anderson wrote: >> I think it's fair to say that a program which deliberately causes >> fundamental errors is unreasonable. Mike Schilling wrote: > Really? To me, destructive testing is absolutely necessary, That doesn't contradict tom's point, which, to combine both your observations, is that unreasonable apps are sometimes absolutely necessary. "Unreasonable" != "unnecessary" or even "improper". It's not even a computer term, much less rigorously defined in this context. If you guys are going to argue, at least pick theses that contradict each other. For example, pick different numbers for how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. -- Lew
From: Joshua Cranmer on 13 Jun 2010 22:55
On 06/13/2010 09:45 PM, Lew wrote: > If you guys are going to argue, at least pick theses that contradict > each other. For example, pick different numbers for how many angels can > dance on the head of a pin. 36.3 if it doesn't have a bulbous plastic head, 5417.24 if it does. -- Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth |