Java

Jacob Fugal lukfugl at gmail.com
Tue Feb 13 12:19:41 MST 2007


On 2/13/07, Bryan Sant <bryan.sant at gmail.com> wrote:
> Who cares?  My IDE did the work a foreach does before
> anyway.  The same is true for anonymous classes.  It's a non-issue.

It is an issue. In my experience, time spent writing code is a
negligible amount of time I spend developing. A far greater amount of
time is spent grokking existing code and thinking about the issues the
code I'm going to write has to address. When I argue against
verboseness in a language, I'm not complaining about the effort I must
spend to write all the boilerplate, but the semantic noise that it
adds.

Ignoring concepts of language "beauty", if I'm writing an iteration
over a collection, my options with and without foreach are:

  /* without foreach: */
  for(Iterator iter = collection.iterator(); collection.hasNext();) {
      MyObject obj = (MyObject)iter.next();
      /* ... do stuff with obj ... */
  }

  /* with foreach: */
  for (MyObject obj : collection) {
      /* ... do stuff with obj ... */
  }

The foreach version stays out of my way not just when I'm writing that
code, but also when I read it. The IDE can help me enter both versions
just as quickly, but the IDE has no way of helping me reduce the
semantic noise in the first example. That is why it's an issue.

Jacob Fugal



More information about the PLUG mailing list