From: invalid@invalid.invalid   
      
   John Ames  writes:   
   > Richard Kettlewell  wrote:   
   >> I’d suggest that any language that doesn’t start out with odd corners   
   >> like this will grow them over time as it responds to new thinking, new   
   >> requirements, etc.   
   >   
   > True enough, and it is to some degree a question of taste - but Java   
   > does, to my mind, strike a particular balance of vices that remind me   
   > of the main thrust of Kernighan's criticism of Pascal: not only does it   
   > suffer from misfeatures and frustrations, but it provides no real way   
   > to work around them from within itself.   
   >   
   > To a lesser extent, at least; the core language *does* allow the   
   > programmer to define new constructs that can be used (to some extent)   
   > in place of existing ones, whereas vanilla Pascal didn't. If I don't   
   > like the organization of the Math class, f'rexample, I'm free create my   
   > own. But there are practical limits to this - I can't snap my fingers   
   > and make everything *else* in the standard library recognize MyMath's   
   > way of doing things. The deeper some annoyance lies within the system,   
   > the more you'd have to uproot in order to fix it.   
      
   Actually you can do that in Java, in at least a couple of ways.   
      
   https://stackoverflow.com/questions/33631419/replace-a-class-wit   
   in-the-java-class-library-with-a-custom-version   
      
   --   
   https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)