So please do enlighten. Now is your time!
Liutauras Vilda wrote:and I think you were mistaken about this statement. While you don't understand Hello World written in its simplest form, there is no point in going further towards more difficult code
Let it be random. That's the way children learn!
Liutauras Vilda wrote:This thread is already going in a quite chaotic way (in my opinion), and going same way any further will make it worse, I'm afraid.
So, why are you waiting for? Fire!
Liutauras Vilda wrote:I have mentioned to you before ... For a start, try to understand this statement and its separate pieces ... Did it happen? If not, why are you trying to go any further?
Campbell Ritchie wrote:No, there is a different window on Eclipse for passing command line arguments. Once you have entered arguments, those arguments stay there for ever . . . or until you go back to the window and change them ...You can still use the console for Scanner inScan = new Scanner(System.in); or similar. Note that input to the Eclipse console changes automatically to green text
Okay! I will practice and get back.
Campbell Ritchie wrote:You were asking about System.out.println yesterday ... I wrote an explanation here.
I read the link.
My question is: Then why is the API tutorials written so confusingly? It will take a lot of time to overcome the learning curve to understand Java, I find!
Campbell Ritchie wrote:... You can pass absolutely anything to System.out.println as long as you have not more than one argument, and the compiler will find some version of the method that can handle it ...
Can this line in my immediately earlier post be changed?
Rajib Ban wrote:My question is: Then why is the written so confusingly? It will take a lot of time to overcome the learning curve to understand Java, I find!
Wherein, could the phrase API tutorials above(like in the quote above) be replaced by the phrase Java™ Platform, Standard Edition 8, API Specification ? Is that possible?
Liutauras Vilda wrote:
Rajib Ban wrote:How do I pass it arguments? I am executing via Eclipse 'Run'.
Executing program via console, is easier to pass arguments in my opinion.
Not necessarily. As you all know I'm a convinced CLI hater, and when I had to use command line arguments in my IDE, I simply used:
I found that very practical to use. Of course, as Campbell wrote, there is an option to enter the arguments in a dedicated form (in NetBeans: rightclick on the project, select the option "run" and fill in whatever you want), but I only use that for setting the maximum memory.
Piet Souris wrote:... I'm a convinced CLI hater, and when I had to use command line arguments in my IDE, I simply used...I found that very practical... as Campbell wrote, there is an option to enter the arguments in a dedicated form (in NetBeans: rightclick on the project, select the option "run" and fill in whatever you want), but I only use that for setting the maximum memory.
Yes, thanks! But what about in Eclipse?
click the "Run" option in the bar above, then choose "Run configurations", select the "arguments" tab, and fill in. But my version of Eclipse is "Luna", and so the current versions might work differently.
But, try to look these things up for yourself first, since elastic 3D bouncing balls need much more looking up and finding out than this.
Edit : you did exactly that, so well done!
Hmm, from memory: I think that is correct. I usually R‑click the class in the L perspective, and find the run instruction from the dropdown list, myself.
Piet Souris wrote:Hmm, from memory:
click the "Run" option in the bar above, then choose "Run configurations" . . .
Unfortunately, I think OP has been unlucky and found a site which doesn't teach very well.
elastic 3D bouncing balls need much more looking up and finding out than this.
Edit : you did exactly that, so well done!
Somebody has already told you there is a difference between a specification and a tutorial. It may seem petty, but changing the post to remove the word tutorial would have made subsequent replies confusing. Sorry for not changing it, but I believe the post shouldn't be changed. There are tutorials about, and this is one of them. I think it doesn't introduce object‑orientation (=OO) early enough, nor use a strict OO programming style, but it is the most comprehensive tutorial I have ever seen.
Rajib Ban wrote:. . . why is the API tutorials written so confusingly? It will take a lot of time to overcome the learning curve to understand Java, I find!
Yesterday, Jesper told you the documentation isn't a tutorial, and I told you it would take time to become familiar with it. Liutauras gave you some examples of the Hello World program converted to objet‑orientation. Had you gone through that code line by line you would have learnt a lot more than from the bouncing balls. You should be taking that code apart line by line and token by token and asking about what you don't understand. Henry and I both said the bouncing balls site wasn't much good for learning Java®. You appear to be trying to do too many things at once. Children might learn by doing things randomly (I am pretty sure they don't really) but I have not come across anybody who has learnt programming like that.
We are trying to help and willing to help, but you persist on taking a bad learning path.
The API documentation is not written confusingly. It is written for experienced people (which you might find from this link) and some things have to be difficult because the subject is difficult. It is not possible for the System class to have a section about println because the println method is defined in another class. As I said, you need to take time to learn your way around that website, just as you take time to learn your way around a strange town. You should also ask about things you don't understand in the documentation.
Children learn patiently and slowly; it takes a child at least three years to learn to talk so anybody can understand them, and I think you need to apply some patience to your learning.
For me yours is the third forum that is so helpful. The first two were Knoppix and Debian. So whatever criticisms I encounter I am more than willing to accept.
Regarding my multi-tracks I will slow down after I have had my first quantum of fodder that I could ruminate at leisure. That point is approaching fast!
So bear with me a little while more!
And please, quickly give me the rights to edit my posts for at least a few hours. I am a fussy writer who wants to keep posts clean.
Bear Bibeault wrote:Then I'd suggest that you make copious use of the Preview capability before submitting your posts.
No, you could compare me with a tubelight that has a defective starter and a choke. Takes some time to glow as I take some re-reading to identify areas for improvements ;-)
Rajib Ban wrote:No, you could compare me with a tubelight that has a defective starter and a choke. Takes some time to glow as I take some re-reading to identify areas for improvements ;-)
Unfortunately editing of posts is restricted so, as Bear has suggested, use Preview and don't press the Submit button until your light is shining brightly.