How to learning java without pay money?
in [Java Programming]
|
Prev: Keyboards
Next: web application load xls file ?
From: bugbear on 26 Apr 2010 04:11 Tom Anderson wrote: > On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Pitch wrote: > >> In article <29e289da-30b6-403b-bd38- >> f2839f3a0eeb(a)h31g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, blumstein.clarence(a)gmail.com >> says... >> >>> I have no money to buy any about java, but I want to learn java, what >>> should I do when I have no money to buy a good book? >> >> You don't need books to learn any language. > > I bet there are some languages only used on IBM mainframes for which no > tutorial information is freely available. You'd need books to learn those. Yeah. but JCL is both self-evident and self-documenting... ;-) BugBear
From: Pitch on 26 Apr 2010 05:02 In article <hqtdln$hmb$2(a)news.albasani.net>, noone(a)lewscanon.com says... > > blumstein.clarence(a)gmail.com says... > >>>> I have no money to buy any about java [sic], but I want to learn java [sic], > >>>> what should I do when I have no money to buy a good book? > > Pitch wrote: > >>> You don't need books to learn any language. > > Lew wrote: > >> Well, aren't you Mr. Helpful? > > Pitch wrote: > > Of course I am, I saved him a lot of money. > > You're taking credit for what the OP expressed in the first place? My, my. Do you have a problem with other people views? Anyway, flaming is not much helpful too, so why don't you stop? :) > > There is enough helpful people on the net and one just needs to ask. > > And you don't feel the need to be one of them, I see. What's helpful to you may be less helpful to him. You can't decide for the OP. -- stirr your cofee properly
From: Arved Sandstrom on 26 Apr 2010 12:53
Tom Anderson wrote: [ SNIP ] > I guess Eckels is writing in the traditional mode of OO thought, in > which inheritance was much more important than it is today. Given that > his background is in C++, that's not surprising. I wouldn't go so far as > to say that it's not "thinking in java", but it does seem a mistake to > describe only the traditional approach, and not the more modern one. > > tom I don't think it's quite this simple, that there was a unsophisticated first phase of OO where inheritance ruled, and now we've moved over to a more sophisticated view that emphasizes composition and aggregation and interfaces and a return to messaging. Fact is, there was plenty enough evidence 25 or 30 years ago that inheritance could be easily abused, and there was enough discussion of it. Of course, all that discussion was pre-Web and also fairly academic, so who knows how many current practitioners were exposed to it back in the '80's or 90's? It might therefore be more accurate to say that Eckel, if he is in fact overly emphasizing inheritance (*), is writing in a pre-modern mainstream mode of thought - I hesitate to call it traditional. And I agree with you that his background in C++ could not have helped; he started with that about a decade before he started with Java. Maybe it's then most accurate to say that Eckel is/was writing in a C++ mode of OO thought. AHS * Eckel is one of the guys that I rarely read. His views on checked exceptions in Java were pretty much the nail in the coffin as far as I was concerned. |