Hey, how about an additional JavaRanch college like CattleDrive? Let's call it Ridn&Ropn or BroncBustn or Brandn. The focus would be teaching the API in 'concrete' terms. I would pay a pretty penny for it. As long as Java insists on the long way around the mountain I would think others would as well. :roll:
I know the API is vast and dynamic and could not reasonably be dealt with blow by blow. But in it's current state, putting it in a Cattle Ranch context, I am to understand all their is to know about a particular rancher's cattle merely by a view of his registered brand in the state brand book - not! So the only example that immediately comes to mind is found at Paul Wheaton's TextFileIn doc. I just about fell out of the chair when I saw an actual example in a JavaDoc. :roll: So, I wonder if there could be a handfull or so of typical scenarios that come up requiring a march through the docs, then take a step-by-step instruction of how and what to look for, with actual USE of the package|class|methods in mind? There must be a process about it that I just ain't gettn pardner. A for instance would be BigInteger. What is listed in the docs is absolutely meaningless without further explanation. Maybe I'm just thick? Thanks
<bullshitting> What's wrong with BigInteger? The useful methods are add(), multiply() and toString(). The interesting constructor is the one that takes a String. The two static constants are also interesting. That took about 2 to 3 minutes to realize. </bullshitting> I needed to learn the ability to scan documentation and books quickly, and filter out the part I needed, very early in my career. If I could not find what I wanted I shifted into a lower gear and actually started reading what I was looking at. So Donald, it not a question of the thickness but the width I think it's a matter of knowing what you are looking for and looking for the things that ought to do it. [ May 04, 2003: Message edited by: Barry Gaunt ]
Forget it. I'll figure it out eventually - I always do. PS. If you ain't got no bullshit, you ain't got no bulls. If'n you ain't got no bulls you ain't got no reason for a CattleDrive; 'cause you ain't got no calves! [ May 04, 2003: Message edited by: Donald R. Cossitt ]
Creating a whole new college for this seems like overkill - learning to interpret APIs (good, bad, or ugly) is really part of learning to program. I think that any assignments for such a college would look pretty similar to current Cattle Drive assignments - give the student a problem that forces them to go to existing APIs for information, then let them stuggle to find a solution, and give feedback as appropriate. Would you benefit from more assignments of this form, to gain more experience? Offhand I'm thinking that maybe the best approach here might be for someone to write an article (or series of articles) on how to approach an unfamiliar API and get what you need out of if it in a reasonable amount of time. Anyone want to take a stab at something like this?
(good, bad, or ugly) If I see one more Cowboy metaphor in this thread I think I'll bang my head on the desk. Now I've got that lame-assed Hugo Montenegro theme song hung in my head for the next week. Thanks Jim! [ May 04, 2003: Message edited by: Michael Morris ]
[BFG]: that lame-assed Hugo Montenegro theme song Godless heathen! That should be "that excellent Ennio Morricone theme". But I suppose if you've been listening to Montenegro's watered-down version, well, there's your problem. :roll: [Doco]: Sorry I blew up! S'allright. [Doco]: You no lika d'spaghetti westerns? Not a big fan - except for some of the music. Though Morricone's best work is surely the soundtrack for The Mission. As for TextFileIn - to be honest, I don't see what the class's purpose is. To use it, you need to know how to use a BufferedReader first. And once you know that, well, the only thing TextFileIn provides is that you get to write
rather than
which doesn't really seem worth making a whole new class for, IMO... [ May 04, 2003: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]
Well it's not so much that I don't like the movies, it's just that I doubt there were that many Arab or Paso Fino horses in the Western Hemisphere in the 19th century and the accuracy of a period single action Colt is absolutely horrible; which is not well protrayed. Or maybe it was just the bad guys that had the bum Colts and Eastwood had the Smith & Wesson 'N' Frame .44 he used in more modern films :roll: . I've seen hangins - they ain't pretty and you don't survive them intact. I've also seen many gunshot wounds made by a 44/45; you get shot anywhere on your body and you go down - not likely to be getting up on your own - unless of course you're on PCP. Other than that the movies' were ok? You might ask how I know some of this stuff? Though from Eastern Oregon I haven't always lived in remote Eastern Oregon and have had a lengthy experience in law enforcement.