Comments on: You can hook code to the Java compiler http://rogersm.net/2008/11/you-can-hook-code-to-the-java-compiler exploring area Tue, 25 Aug 2009 20:26:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: rogersm http://rogersm.net/2008/11/you-can-hook-code-to-the-java-compiler/comment-page-1#comment-20 rogersm Thu, 13 Nov 2008 09:20:29 +0000 http://rogersm.net/?p=17#comment-20 <a href="http://rogersm.net/2008/11/you-can-hook-code-to-the-java-compiler#comment-14" rel="nofollow">@akuhn:</a>: I completely agree it will open a can of new bugs, but I still think it will be useful. Gnu R does something like that and it is surprisingly helpful. @akuhn::

I completely agree it will open a can of new bugs, but I still think it will be useful.
Gnu R does something like that and it is surprisingly helpful.

]]> By: Adrian Kuhn http://rogersm.net/2008/11/you-can-hook-code-to-the-java-compiler/comment-page-1#comment-14 Adrian Kuhn Tue, 11 Nov 2008 00:06:35 +0000 http://rogersm.net/?p=17#comment-14 Gotcha. This is indeed handy (given you have closures). From my experience with Smalltalk, it's best to offer it as an explicit feature. Some nasty runtime bugs may go almost undiscovered when all scalars act as arrays alltime. Thus I typically extend Smalltalk as follows (#do: iterates over a collection and applies a block, ie lambda on all elements): Collection >> #doAsCollection: block self do: block Object >> #doAsCollection: block block value: self UndefinedObject >> #doAsCollection: block "do nothing" If only extending Java would be as simple, smile :) Gotcha. This is indeed handy (given you have closures). From my experience with Smalltalk, it’s best to offer it as an explicit feature. Some nasty runtime bugs may go almost undiscovered when all scalars act as arrays alltime. Thus I typically extend Smalltalk as follows (#do: iterates over a collection and applies a block, ie lambda on all elements):

Collection >> #doAsCollection: block
self do: block

Object >> #doAsCollection: block
block value: self

UndefinedObject >> #doAsCollection: block
“do nothing”

If only extending Java would be as simple, smile :)

]]> By: rogersm http://rogersm.net/2008/11/you-can-hook-code-to-the-java-compiler/comment-page-1#comment-6 rogersm Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:06:22 +0000 http://rogersm.net/?p=17#comment-6 <a href="http://rogersm.net/2008/11/you-can-hook-code-to-the-java-compiler#comment-3" rel="nofollow">@akuhn:</a> I plan to write a post about that, but basically means non-container types (like int, char, float…) should be interpreted as single item container types (arrays, vectors, lists). This allows doing things like: <pre> map(add, elem1, elem2) </pre> without needing to check if elem1 and elem2are containers. Null type should be interpreted as an empty container. @akuhn:
I plan to write a post about that, but basically means non-container types (like int, char, float…) should be interpreted as single item container types (arrays, vectors, lists).
This allows doing things like:

map(add, elem1, elem2)

without needing to check if elem1 and elem2are containers.

Null type should be interpreted as an empty container.

]]> By: Adrian Kuhn http://rogersm.net/2008/11/you-can-hook-code-to-the-java-compiler/comment-page-1#comment-4 Adrian Kuhn Thu, 06 Nov 2008 22:08:51 +0000 http://rogersm.net/?p=17#comment-4 NB the string interpolation is neat! NB the string interpolation is neat!

]]> By: Adrian Kuhn http://rogersm.net/2008/11/you-can-hook-code-to-the-java-compiler/comment-page-1#comment-3 Adrian Kuhn Thu, 06 Nov 2008 22:05:48 +0000 http://rogersm.net/?p=17#comment-3 <blockquote cite="">I’m not into Java any longer, but it would be great to hack an extension so numbers are arrays of length 1.</blockquote> What is the use case of that?

I’m not into Java any longer, but it would be great to hack an extension so numbers are arrays of length 1.

What is the use case of that?

]]>