Java questions which don't deserve their own thread, yet.

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > The Cavern of COBOL > Java questions which don't deserve their own thread, yet.

«‹›303 »

Magicmat: Aug 14, 2000; I've got the worst fucking attorneys

I'm trying to figure out the best way to share an Eclipse project. The folder is on a shared drive (shared via Dropbox), with one computer on Mac OS X and the other using Windows 7.

When I try just pointing Eclipse to the folder as the workspace to open, I get bunch of "file not found" errors, and an empty project.

I'd rather not put the project into version control right now since it's just a small, personal project at the moment. Also, my VCS of choice (Git) kinda sucks on windows.

# ? Aug 22, 2010 00:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 9, 2024 15:44

Janitor Prime: Jan 22, 2004; PC LOAD LETTER

What da fuck does that mean; Fun Shoe

Magicmat posted:

I'm trying to figure out the best way to share an Eclipse project. The folder is on a shared drive (shared via Dropbox), with one computer on Mac OS X and the other using Windows 7.

When I try just pointing Eclipse to the folder as the workspace to open, I get bunch of "file not found" errors, and an empty project.

I'd rather not put the project into version control right now since it's just a small, personal project at the moment. Also, my VCS of choice (Git) kinda sucks on windows.

Use mercurial with tortoisehg if you still want a decent DVCS on windows. There isn't any excuse.

# ? Aug 22, 2010 00:50

Magicmat: Aug 14, 2000; I've got the worst fucking attorneys

MEAT TREAT posted:

Use mercurial with tortoisehg if you still want a decent DVCS on windows. There isn't any excuse.

I'm a Git man, though. Usually I do 90% of my dev work on OS X and when I do work on Windows, I keep it in the shared folder and do my commits from OS X. Failing that, I bite the bullet and use the Windows version of Git.

But that's getting off topic

Is there an easy way to just open a Eclipse workspace on another system?

# ? Aug 22, 2010 01:06

epswing: Nov 4, 2003; Soiled Meat

Just right click the project in the Project Explorer, export to zip, save the file into dropbox.

Then open eclipse on the other machine, right click empty space in Project Explorer (I think), import, select the zip file.

Magicmat posted:

I'm a Git man, though.

Oh quit moaning. For everyday use, the ideas (and many commands) are nearly the same. It's a chance to learn another DVCS. On your next job interview, you can say "yes, I know Mercurial basics." When you want to contribute to a project on BitBucket, you'll know what's going on. What have you got to lose, exactly?

# ? Aug 22, 2010 01:55

Max Facetime: Apr 18, 2009

Maybe it would work using a local workspace on the Windows machine, then Import...->Existing Projects into Workspace, point it to \My Dropbox and then tell it to not copy the project files to the workspace?

I don't think putting the workspace itself to Dropbox is a good idea.

# ? Aug 22, 2010 02:25

Chairman Steve: Mar 9, 2007; Whiter than sour cream

^^ Agreed.

Honestly, I'd like into using something that's IDE-agnostic, such as Maven, to build your project. It has an Eclipse plugin that can be used to generate Eclipse project artifacts by reading the project's POM.

# ? Aug 22, 2010 16:54

Parantumaton: Jan 29, 2009; The OnLy ThInG
i LoVe MoRe
ThAn ChUgGiNg SeMeN
iS gEtTiNg PaId To Be A
sOcIaL MeDiA sHiLl
FoR mIcRoSoFt
AnD nOkIa

Chairman Steve posted:

Honestly, I'd like into using something that's IDE-agnostic, such as Maven, to build your project.

This sentence started with such great potential... (I don't mean that Maven wouldn't be IDE-agnostic, it's more like reality agnostic).

# ? Aug 22, 2010 18:44

danishcake: Aug 15, 2004

A quick question from a C++ guy who is dipping his toes into Java. If I have two preallocated objects, is there a convenient way to do a deep copy of one into the other, avoiding allocating a new one? I really want something a bit like clone() but with an existing target.

# ? Aug 22, 2010 21:23

Janitor Prime: Jan 22, 2004; PC LOAD LETTER

What da fuck does that mean; Fun Shoe

danishcake posted:

A quick question from a C++ guy who is dipping his toes into Java. If I have two preallocated objects, is there a convenient way to do a deep copy of one into the other, avoiding allocating a new one? I really want something a bit like clone() but with an existing target.

If you are not opposed to using an external class the Apache Commons BeanUtils class has the copyProperties method that does what you want. But that if you have non primitive fields inside, it will probably just copy the references and not do a deep copy like you would expect.

# ? Aug 22, 2010 21:38

Chairman Steve: Mar 9, 2007; Whiter than sour cream

Parantumaton posted:

This sentence started with such great potential... (I don't mean that Maven wouldn't be IDE-agnostic, it's more like reality agnostic).

Eh? Care to elaborate?

# ? Aug 22, 2010 22:29

Magicmat: Aug 14, 2000; I've got the worst fucking attorneys

I'm having trouble with reading a webpage via a URLConnection object using a proxy. I'm using a Proxy object with the url.openConnection(proxy) method.

My code is designed to test a bunch of proxies, so what it's supposed to do is just try to access the same web page over and over, with a new proxy each time. Each proxy has no guarantee of being functional in any way (hence why I'm testing them.)

The problem is that Java seems to do it's own thing in terms of my proxy settings. For example, I have it setup to connect with no proxy, proxy A, proxy B and proxy C. My webserver's logs, however, show it being accessed with no proxy, no proxy, proxy B and proxy B. Sometimes it's no proxy, proxy A, proxy A, proxy C; or some other random combination.

What's going on here? Why is Java holding over old proxy info when I'm setting it on a per-connection basic?

You can see my horrible, messy, prototype-quality code here.

Magicmat fucked around with this message at 22:10 on Aug 23, 2010

# ? Aug 23, 2010 21:51

Chairman Steve: Mar 9, 2007; Whiter than sour cream

Is it in any way possible that it has something to do with Java's caching of DNS resolution[1]?

http://myhowto.org/java/42-understanding-host-name-resolution-and-dns-behavior-in-java/

# ? Aug 24, 2010 01:27

Magicmat: Aug 14, 2000; I've got the worst fucking attorneys

Chairman Steve posted:

Is it in any way possible that it has something to do with Java's caching of DNS resolution[1]?

http://myhowto.org/java/42-understanding-host-name-resolution-and-dns-behavior-in-java/

Hmm, I tried adding

code:

System.setProperty("networkaddress.cache.ttl", "0");
System.setProperty("networkaddress.cache.negative.ttl", "0");

to the start of my Main, but it didn't seem to affect anything. I could use the JNI method they detail in that article to flush the domain cache, but using JNI is something I'd rather avoid, if possible.

If there's no way around this, I may just write my own proxy-capable basic HTTP class over a Socket. Kinda sucky, but I'm not sure what else to do.

# ? Aug 24, 2010 06:40

Max Facetime: Apr 18, 2009

Magicmat posted:

You can see my horrible, messy, prototype-quality code here.

You're not closing the connections or streams properly, so they might be closed only when the program terminates. This could affect the order and timestamps of the log entries the webserver outputs.

Also, try adding a 10 second delay between testing different proxies to see whether the duplicate log entries come from the same or different proxies.

# ? Aug 24, 2010 07:26

Magicmat: Aug 14, 2000; I've got the worst fucking attorneys

I am in posted:

You're not closing the connections or streams properly, so they might be closed only when the program terminates. This could affect the order and timestamps of the log entries the webserver outputs.

Ah ha, I think that was it. Adding a disconnect() call followed by a close() call (the other order didn't work) seems to have fixed it, at least for my sample size of four proxies.

Thanks for the help!

# ? Aug 24, 2010 08:03

Tomed2000: Jun 24, 2002

I'm pretty familiar with object-oriented Python and I used to use do some object-oriented C++ years ago so the Java syntax looks somewhat familiar to me. What are some are good resources for learning Java if I'm already pretty familiar with object-oriented design?

I found this interesting site which I'm going through now but wouldn't mind picking up a book if there are any good suggestions.

# ? Aug 24, 2010 19:31

omlette-a-gogo: May 26, 2010

A good habit to get into is to close all streams in a finally block:

code:

InputStream in = null;
try {
    in = getInputStreamFromSomewhere();
    // Do stuff with the input stream
} catch (Exception ex) {
    // Handle it, or wrap and rethrow
} finally {
    if (in != null) {
        try {
            in.close();
        } catch (IOException ex2) {
            // Log it, or eat it.
        }
    }
}

In fact I do this so often I wrote a helper class that I am always reusing:

code:

public class IoHelper
{
    public static void close(InputStream in)
    {
        if (in != null) {
            try {
                in.close(); 
            } catch (IOException ex) {
                // Eat it.
            }
        }
    }

    public static void close(OutputStream out);
    public static void close(Writer w);
    public static void close(Reader r);
    // etc. for other closable classes
}

# ? Aug 25, 2010 16:58

omlette-a-gogo: May 26, 2010

fletcher posted:

How come something like this works:
code:
public static String[] test() {
	String[] stuff = { "stuff" };
	return stuff;
}
but this does not:
code:
public static String[] test() {
	return { "stuff" };
}
(not that I want to use it, just curious)

Because the Java compiler is interpreting {"stuff"}; as a static initializer in the first case, and a block of code in the second, which makes no lexical sense. You could replace the second case with return new String[]{"stuff"}; and it should work fine.

# ? Aug 26, 2010 01:48

Chairman Steve: Mar 9, 2007; Whiter than sour cream

omlette-a-gogo posted:

In fact I do this so often I wrote a helper class that I am always reusing:

http://commons.apache.org/io/api-release/org/apache/commons/io/IOUtils.html#closeQuietly(java.io.InputStream)

Learn to love Apache commons! :eng101:

Or for some Java 6 goodiness: http://guava-libraries.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/javadoc/com/google/common/io/Closeables.html#closeQuietly(java.io.Closeable)

# ? Aug 26, 2010 03:09

necrobobsledder: Mar 21, 2005; Lay down your soul to the gods rock 'n roll; Nap Ghost

I'd still prefer to get RAII / RAII-like conventions like C#'s using, although Closeables could be turned into syntactic sugar like for ( : ) loops, but given the history of the JSRB, I only expect :psyduck:

after

Always hoped to have something like a synchronized block become an arbitrary block reflecting the scope of an object's lifetime with the end of the block automatically invoking the finalize method. But... garbage collection and :effort:

# ? Aug 26, 2010 09:25

Parantumaton: Jan 29, 2009; The OnLy ThInG
i LoVe MoRe
ThAn ChUgGiNg SeMeN
iS gEtTiNg PaId To Be A
sOcIaL MeDiA sHiLl
FoR mIcRoSoFt
AnD nOkIa

JDK7 will have automatic resource management.

# ? Aug 26, 2010 13:25

Mustach: Mar 2, 2003; In this long line, there's been some real strange genes. You've got 'em all, with some extras thrown in.

When's that coming out, again?

# ? Aug 26, 2010 15:01

TURTLE SLUT: Dec 12, 2005

I'm trying to have a Vector array with four Vectors containing four different types of objects that are all subclasses to the same superclass, so that I could refer to the Vectors with index numbers. This is how I'm trying to do it:

code:

Vector<SuperClass> vectors[] = new Vector[] { new Vector<SubClassOne>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassTwo>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassThree>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassFour>()  };

However, this gives me a type safety warning. I've tried several different ways of expressing this and reading Java Generics tutorials and such, but it just keeps giving some kind of type mismatch error/warning and confusing me.

I'm very new to this whole Java thing - actually to programming in general - so I could be missing something obvious or trying to do this in a completely retarded way, I just don't know! Is this even possible, or is the type safety warning harmless?

edit: the exact type safety warning is "Type safety: The expression of type Vector[] needs unchecked conversion to conform to Vector<SuperClass>[]" :confused:

TURTLE SLUT fucked around with this message at 15:44 on Aug 26, 2010

# ? Aug 26, 2010 15:38

trex eaterofcadrs: Jun 17, 2005; My lack of understanding is only exceeded by my lack of concern.

Mustach posted:

When's that coming out, again?

You could theoretically start using it now, although I'm not sure how much of the Java TCK it actually passes. I'm hoping the one good thing to come out of the Oracle buy-out is a more intent focus on getting this poo poo out the door.

# ? Aug 26, 2010 15:52

Kilson: Jan 16, 2003; I EAT LITTLE CHILDREN FOR BREAKFAST !!11!!1!!!!111!

Cukel posted:

I'm trying to have a Vector array with four Vectors containing four different types of objects that are all subclasses to the same superclass, so that I could refer to the Vectors with index numbers. This is how I'm trying to do it:
code:
Vector<SuperClass> vectors[] = new Vector[] { new Vector<SubClassOne>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassTwo>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassThree>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassFour>()  };
However, this gives me a type safety warning. I've tried several different ways of expressing this and reading Java Generics tutorials and such, but it just keeps giving some kind of type mismatch error/warning and confusing me.

I'm very new to this whole Java thing - actually to programming in general - so I could be missing something obvious or trying to do this in a completely retarded way, I just don't know! Is this even possible, or is the type safety warning harmless?

edit: the exact type safety warning is "Type safety: The expression of type Vector[] needs unchecked conversion to conform to Vector<SuperClass>[]"

You can't create generic arrays in Java. The warning isn't something to be terribly worried about, as long as you're sure you're putting correctly subclassed vectors into the array.

More specifically, you probably should do something like:

code:

Vector<? extends SuperClass> vectors[] = new Vector[4];
vectors[0] = new Vector<SubClassOne>();
...

The way you've done it, on the RHS, you're creating a Vector[], and you could put anything in there. You could be putting { new Vector<Dick>(), new Vector<Butt>()... } on the RHS, and it wouldn't complain. But when you go to use it, you'd get some kind of runtime error.

However, if you do this:

code:

Vector<SuperClass>[] vectors = new Vector[4];
vectors[0] = new Vector<NotSubClass>();
vectors[1] = new Vector<SubClassOne>();

It gives you a type mismatch error on both lines 2 and 3. Using <? extends SuperClass> will allow line 3, but throws a type mismatch error on line 2.

Kilson fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Aug 26, 2010

# ? Aug 26, 2010 16:09

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

Parantumaton posted:

JDK7 will have automatic resource management.

Any chance for a link on that? Can't seem to find it on the Sun^wOracle website.

# ? Aug 26, 2010 16:19

TURTLE SLUT: Dec 12, 2005

Kilson posted:

You can't create generic arrays in Java.

Why is it a generic array? Just because I'm using Vectors? Because this gives the exact same warning:

code:

Vector<SubClassOne> vectors[] = new Vector[] { new Vector<SubClassOne>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassOne>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassOne>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassOne>()  };

And there's no generics involved as much as I understand. Oh well, if it's not possible, guess I'll just have to make four different very similar methods for handling each of the Vectors, which is just dumb.

# ? Aug 26, 2010 16:22

lewi: Sep 3, 2006; King

Cukel posted:

Why is it a generic array? Just because I'm using Vectors? Because this gives the exact same warning:
code:
Vector<SubClassOne> vectors[] = new Vector[] { new Vector<SubClassOne>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassOne>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassOne>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassOne>()  };
And there's no generics involved as much as I understand. Oh well, if it's not possible, guess I'll just have to make four different very similar methods for handling each of the Vectors, which is just dumb.

Can you not make a Vector<Vector<SuperClass>>?

# ? Aug 26, 2010 16:25

Kilson: Jan 16, 2003; I EAT LITTLE CHILDREN FOR BREAKFAST !!11!!1!!!!111!

Cukel posted:

Why is it a generic array? Just because I'm using Vectors? Because this gives the exact same warning:

See my longer response above. A generic array would be something like

code:

new Vector<Blah>[];

Since you can't do that, but you have specified on the LHS that the array is of type Vector<SuperClass>[], you get the unchecked conversion warning.

# ? Aug 26, 2010 16:28

TURTLE SLUT: Dec 12, 2005

Okay, thanks a lot for the help! Vector<Vector<SuperClass>> seems to work too and is much more fun, so I think I'm going to go with that. At least I tried it and didn't get any errors or warnings.

# ? Aug 26, 2010 16:34

Max Facetime: Apr 18, 2009

OddObserver posted:

Any chance for a link on that? Can't seem to find it on the Sun^wOracle website.

It's called Project Coin. The proposal looks like to add a list of suppressed exceptions to Throwable, which deals neatly with the case where closing a resource throws an exception while another exception has already been thrown.

# ? Aug 26, 2010 17:27

omlette-a-gogo: May 26, 2010

Cukel posted:

I'm trying to have a Vector array with four Vectors containing four different types of objects that are all subclasses to the same superclass, so that I could refer to the Vectors with index numbers. This is how I'm trying to do it:
code:
Vector<SuperClass> vectors[] = new Vector[] { new Vector<SubClassOne>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassTwo>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassThree>(),
                                              new Vector<SubClassFour>()  };
However, this gives me a type safety warning. I've tried several different ways of expressing this and reading Java Generics tutorials and such, but it just keeps giving some kind of type mismatch error/warning and confusing me.

I'm very new to this whole Java thing - actually to programming in general - so I could be missing something obvious or trying to do this in a completely retarded way, I just don't know! Is this even possible, or is the type safety warning harmless?

edit: the exact type safety warning is "Type safety: The expression of type Vector[] needs unchecked conversion to conform to Vector<SuperClass>[]"

You are much better off redesigning this by implementing a new class containing the four vectors as member variables then putting in whatever methods you might need to manipulate or access them. Also consider using List unless there is a specific need for Vector.

code:

public class FourList
{
    private List<SubTypeOne> m_listOne;
    // etc.

    public FourList()
    {
        m_listOne = new ArrayList<SubTypeOne>();
        //etc.
    }

    public List<SubTypeOne> getListOne()
    {
        return m_listOne;
    }
    //etc.
}

This will remove any ambiguity about which lists contain which datatypes.

# ? Aug 26, 2010 17:33

omlette-a-gogo: May 26, 2010

Cukel posted:

Okay, thanks a lot for the help! Vector<Vector<SuperClass>> seems to work too and is much more fun, so I think I'm going to go with that. At least I tried it and didn't get any errors or warnings.

Better is Vector<Vector<? extends SuperClass>>. But this datatype implies that whoever has a reference to it can do all sorts of stuff that you might not want them to do, like add/remove data from the vectors or add/remove entire vectors from the top-level vector. If there is any kind of structure or access control that needs to be enforced you should build it in to a new class and not rely on users to do the right thing.

# ? Aug 26, 2010 18:09

Parantumaton: Jan 29, 2009; The OnLy ThInG
i LoVe MoRe
ThAn ChUgGiNg SeMeN
iS gEtTiNg PaId To Be A
sOcIaL MeDiA sHiLl
FoR mIcRoSoFt
AnD nOkIa

OddObserver posted:

Any chance for a link on that? Can't seem to find it on the Sun^wOracle website.

http://blogs.sun.com/darcy/entry/project_coin_updated_arm_spec
http://blogs.sun.com/darcy/entry/project_coin_arm_implementation
http://blogs.sun.com/darcy/entry/project_coin_try_out_try

...and a bunch of other stuff from that blog.

# ? Aug 26, 2010 21:09

TURTLE SLUT: Dec 12, 2005

omlette-a-gogo posted:

Better is Vector<Vector<? extends SuperClass>>. But this datatype implies that whoever has a reference to it can do all sorts of stuff that you might not want them to do, like add/remove data from the vectors or add/remove entire vectors from the top-level vector. If there is any kind of structure or access control that needs to be enforced you should build it in to a new class and not rely on users to do the right thing.

I tried making a Vector<Vector<? extends SuperClass>>, but when trying to add SubClasses into the Vector<? extends SuperClass>, I got weird cryptic errors. Something about type not applicable. Vector<Vector<SuperClass>> seems to work fine. This is quite confusing!

edit: of course I did not run any of this yet so I dunno if I'll get more problems then. Just going by what Eclipse is telling me.

TURTLE SLUT fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Aug 26, 2010

# ? Aug 26, 2010 22:48

rjmccall: Sep 7, 2007; no worries friend; Fun Shoe

Cukel posted:

Vector<Vector<? extends SuperClass>>

This type effectively disallows both adding child vectors to it and adding elements to its child vectors. I don't know why it was suggested.

Vector<Vector<SuperClass>> only works if the inner vectors have type Vector<SuperClass>. The reason why is complicated.

Without question, you should be using a class with instance fields that have the appropriate vector types.

# ? Aug 26, 2010 23:31

omlette-a-gogo: May 26, 2010

rjmccall posted:

This type effectively disallows both adding child vectors to it and adding elements to its child vectors. I don't know why it was suggested.

Vector<Vector<SuperClass>> only works if the inner vectors have type Vector<SuperClass>. The reason why is complicated.

Without question, you should be using a class with instance fields that have the appropriate vector types.

It does work, but it's a meaningless argument, there has got to be a better way to model the data. Compressed to save space, not interested in finding out how many lines of code I can post before getting banned.

code:

import java.util.Vector;

abstract class Base { public abstract int getNum(); }
class SubOne extends Base { public int getNum() { return 1; } }
class SubTwo extends Base { public int getNum() { return 2; } }
class SubThree extends Base { public int getNum() { return 3; } }
class SubFour extends Base { public int getNum() { return 4; } }

public class VectorTest
{
    public static void main(String[] args)
    {
        Vector<Vector<? extends Base>> vv = new Vector<Vector<? extends Base>>();

        Vector<SubOne> v1 = new Vector<SubOne>();
        v1.add(new SubOne());
        v1.add(new SubOne());
        vv.add(v1);

        Vector<SubTwo> v2 = new Vector<SubTwo>();
        v2.add(new SubTwo());
        v2.add(new SubTwo());
        vv.add(v2);

        Vector<SubThree> v3 = new Vector<SubThree>();
        v3.add(new SubThree());
        v3.add(new SubThree());
        vv.add(v3);

        Vector<SubFour> v4 = new Vector<SubFour>();
        v4.add(new SubFour());
        v4.add(new SubFour());
        vv.add(v4);

        for (Vector<? extends Base> v : vv) {
            for (Base b : v) {
                System.out.println(b.getNum());
            }
        }
    }
}

# ? Aug 26, 2010 23:55

TURTLE SLUT: Dec 12, 2005

rjmccall posted:

This type effectively disallows both adding child vectors to it and adding elements to its child vectors. I don't know why it was suggested.

Vector<Vector<SuperClass>> only works if the inner vectors have type Vector<SuperClass>. The reason why is complicated.

Without question, you should be using a class with instance fields that have the appropriate vector types.

Doesn't using a class without a Vector array or Vector<Vector> of some kind defeat the original purpose? Which was to be able to refer to the different Vector<SubClass>-fields with an index number. Or am I misunderstanding what you're saying somehow.

Right now I have a separate class that contains the Vector<Vector<SuperClass>>, and it simplified the class a bit and seems to work as expected in some tests I did. I'm still really fuzzy on why this exact implementation works or if it's even supposed to work, but eh.

# ? Aug 27, 2010 00:14

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

omlette-a-gogo posted:

A good habit to get into is to close all streams in a finally block:

You can also use helper methods to handle all of the boilerplate:

code:

public static void main(String args[]) {
		readLines(new File("foo.txt"), new SimpleLineReader() {
			public void read(String line) {
				System.out.println("EOF");
			}
		});
	}

Where readlines, and SimpleLineReader are in some class:

code:

	interface LineReader {
		void read(String line);
		void eof();
		void error(IOException e);
	}

	static abstract class SimpleLineReader implements LineReader {
		public abstract void read(String line);
		public void eof() {}
		public void error(IOException e) {
			throw new RuntimeException(e);
		};
	}
	static boolean readLines(File f, LineReader r) {
		BufferedReader input = null;
		try {
			input =  new BufferedReader(new FileReader(f));
			while (true) {
				String line = input.readLine();
				if (line != null) {
					r.read(line);
				} else {
					break;
				}
			}
			r.eof();
			return true;
		} catch (IOException e) {
			r.error(e);
			return false;
		} finally {
			if (input != null) {
				try {
					input.close();
				} catch (IOException ex2) {
					// Log it, or eat it.
				}
			}
		}
	}

I can't be arsed to test it, but hopefully you can see what i'm aiming at.

# ? Aug 27, 2010 00:31

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 9, 2024 15:44

Chairman Steve: Mar 9, 2007; Whiter than sour cream

Or use the file-read methods of FileUtils[1] or Files[2].

1. http://commons.apache.org/io/api-1.4/org/apache/commons/io/FileUtils.html#readLines(java.io.File)
2. http://guava-libraries.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/javadoc/com/google/common/io/Files.html#readLines(java.io.File, java.nio.charset.Charset)

# ? Aug 27, 2010 03:07

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > The Cavern of COBOL > Java questions which don't deserve their own thread, yet.

«‹›303 »