From: "Paul Ranson" 

So why bring up JavaDoc rather than operator overloading, lack of compile
time type safety, 'finalization', memory leaks in the face of a GC or
'interfaces'? To name just a few that I happen to know about.

Paul

"Adam Flinton"  wrote in
message news:3f954949$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> Paul Ranson wrote:
>
> > Why would you expect Java to have similar bodges to HTML?
> >
>
> I wouldn't.
>
> Adam
>
> > Paul
> >
> > "Adam Flinton"  wrote
in message
> > news:3f94f491$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> >
> >>Paul Ranson wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I think you won't find HTML in comments, you'll find
scripts and other
> >>>executables. And it's to do with backward compatibility. I don't see
the
> >>>problem. You're a Java user and advocate, you're used to a bodged
> >
> > language.
> >
> >>>Paul
> >>>
> >>>"Adam Flinton"
 wrote in message
> >>>news:3f93db4d$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Not so it would seem given you can chuck code &
possibly more html
into
> >>>>the comments which would be parsed (because they're not really
comments
> >>>>) thus could provide something for the interpreter to choke on.
> >>>>
> >>>>Adam
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>The only similar thing in java is JavaDoc & then you can
strip all of
> >>that out w/o changing the program one whit.
> >>
> >>Adam
> >>
> >
> >
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5