extends and implements

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Mon, 07 Nov 2011 14:07:56 -0500, %u <null at dddd.com> wrote:

> == Quote from Steven Schveighoffer (schveiguy at yahoo.com)'s article
>> On Mon, 07 Nov 2011 13:22:07 -0500, %u <null at devnull.com> wrote:
>> In order for such a humongously code-breaking change to occur,
> there would
>> have to be dire reasons why this was necessary.  Because you
> liked Java is
>> not a qualifying reason.
>> -Steve
>
> Hey man,  Sorry if I annoyed you.  No need to feel insulted.  I get
> it: the *real* reason is that it will break alot of code.  I'm just
> asking, it's not a big deal.  I find that it helps readability.
> But as others have stated, you list the the extended class first
> and that's good enough!

The Internet is not always conducive to the emotional interpretation of  
words.  Sorry if I sounded annoyed/insulted.  I simply was identifying  
that you asked for a change that would break almost all code, and your  
reason was because you "liked it."  I'm not annoyed, but I wanted you to  
understand what you were asking for and what appears to be your reason.   
We would need more -- a lot more.

That being said, even if there was a really good reason (maybe there is, I  
don't know), the bar for changing something so common in the syntax has to  
be set very very high.  It may be something we can't change even if it's  
for a good reason.

-Steve