Re: Ensuring a method is overridden
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
---910079544-591767339-1252523809=:7128
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Robert Klemme wrote:
On 9 Sep., 11:45, Christian <fakem...@xyz.de> wrote:
Robert Klemme schrieb:> On 09.09.2009 05:01, Roedy Green wrote:
On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 22:42:31 +0200, Robert Klemme
<shortcut...@googlemail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
someone who said :
Also, asserts are (and should be) OFF most of the time.
An assert on program structure needs to be on only once.
I am not so sure about turning asserts off. ?Why?
1. a clever compiler optimises them out or makes them low overhead.
They cannot be optimized away by the compiler because enabling and
disabling them is a function of the JVM - not a compile time option.
the JVM is the compiler ... its java ?runtime is compiletime
Roedy did not mention JIT. When I read "compiler" without further
qualification in a Java forum this translates to "Java compiler".
A remarkable assumption. Be careful not to make it in future.
Anyway, that whole discussion is meaningless with regard to Roedy's
statement that you want assertions on all the time. This is abusing
assertions and not making best use of them.
You can argue that it is or should be unnecessary, but other than
perfoemance, i don't think there's an argument that having them on in
production is wrong.
tom
--
""when i go to sleep, i dream "Wow. What a cool period of ulness."" --
TWIC, ox.clubs.ousfg -- William, ox.clubs.ousfg
---910079544-591767339-1252523809=:7128--