Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Stupid Journal Entry

Comments Filter:
  • ribald yet amusing Josh sucks story here.
  • You're a java geek, right? Here's two questions to occupy your brain:
    1. For private properties (i.e. properties that are only used internal to a single class) do you still give them private getters and setters? I say yes for several reasons:
      • It keeps one in the habit of providing getters and setters for when they are vital, kinda like using your turn signal even when there are no other cars on the road to see it.
      • It's more readable to me because I don't have some code that uses getFoo() and some that uses
    • I can only answer 1.

      Getters and Setters are the door way between the private and the public. So they aren't necessary. However, this all brings up coding standards.

      It's more readable to me because I don't have some code that uses getFoo() and some that uses m_blah.foo.

      Thats poor programming and should be stamped out at inspection.

      It gives you an opportunity to encapsulate logic related to getting and setting, such as a single place to do null checking or array bounds.
      This is the strongest argum
    • 1.) Sure, I don't see anything wrong with it (especially since most ide's can put the accessors in for anything). But, for me, having underscores and m_ stuff in your variables dirties the place up to hell. I hate prefixes/postfixes for that kinda stuff.

      2.) I always use the MVC pattern (Model View Controller). If you use it correctly, the view should only contain JSP based info on displaying the pages. Therefore, in your view package, you'd have a "jsp" package for displaying JSPs, and a package for (
      • 2) I dont think anybody ever understands me on this one. I want to build the content of my HTML email using all the exact same code, rules and framework that I use to generate web pages. Therefore I would like a way of saying "Call this JSP, then take the output from it and store it in an email body." Everything I've read says that this is impossible, that the only thing a JSP can write to is the original request's stream. I'm trying basically to subvert that.
  • imagine this post arriving in this journal in a day or two and that no one read it because no one was posting in this JE anymore.
  • You mentioned getting a card for your system with the intenet to play Deus Ex II: IW and I found a review of a new card (nVidia) that is pretty slick. Check it out over here [guru3d.com]


It is much harder to find a job than to keep one.