Re: Best way to force a JComponent to repaint itself

Joshua Cranmer wrote:

Oops. Joshua Cranmer was not supposed to write anything at all. I have made it clear to him that I have no interest in any of his so-called "advice"; regardless of its content, its method of delivery renders it completely unpalatable.

That he has posted again despite knowing that doing so cannot serve his stated intent of giving me advice, it follows that he was lying and that his true intent is merely to smear me in public.

This is completely unacceptable behavior, not to mention that it flagrantly violates the newsgroup's charter, and therefore his internet service provider will shortly be notified of his behavior, which likely violates their Terms of Service.

zerg wrote:
Joshua Cranmer wrote:
If you want to reuse code, use composition. Don't hijack one of the most fundamental principles of OOP.

I wholeheartedly agree, but others don't always follow that advice and I take that into consideration when using others' classes.

This seems to be the core of the conundrum then.

Indeed it does.

(Joshua had nothing else worthwhile to say here.)

The fact that you *refused* to acknowledge that the superclass could
be a source of documentation

That is not a "fact" at all. It is a bald-faced lie. (I'd tell you to stop lying about me OR ELSE, but I expect you will soon get a message from your internet provider telling you the same thing, so why waste the bandwidth?)

I never claimed that a superclass could not be a source of documentation about a subclass. I questioned two things:

1. Less importantly, whether it was reasonable for you to expect me to ALWAYS search the documentation exhaustively all the way up the class hierarchy, including every implemented interface (so, up a branching tree!), even in cases where it looked like code reuse rather than an "is-a" relationship.

2. More importantly, whether your expectations have any relevance here whatsoever, let alone you have any kind of authority to DEMAND that EVERYONE ELSE in the world live up to your expectations OR ELSE, as you have implicitly done by explicitly attacking and character-assassinating everyone that you suspect of NOT meeting your expectations.

I repeat: would a JButton work properly in an old, AWT-only Java deployment?

Yes, provided you have the libraries to define JButton. AWT and Swing mix seamlessly, modulo the different design styles.

I find that surprising. And given your recent propensity for telling bald-faced lies about me, and your pal Arne's dishonest manipulation of the quoted material in another post to make it look like I'd said something that I hadn't, I also don't trust you or any of the others that act very much like you. So I hope you won't mind if I test that for myself before believing it.

It stopped being about Java the instant somebody made it about me.

It stopped being about Java when you stopped talking about Java.

Which happened because MY JAVA PROBLEM GOT SOLVED. That should have meant THE END OF THIS THREAD, since it OBVIOUSLY cannot serve any further on-charter purpose past that point!

The ONLY reason that you and your pals have continued this thread has been because I stood up to you, you don't like that, and so you intend to make an example out of me by blasting me repeatedly in public.

The problem is, not only is such behavior childish and extremely rude, it is also a serious violation of this newsgroup's charter and a serious disruption of this newsgroup. As such, it is probably also a violation of your internet provider's terms of service.

Fortunately, this means that you will, in all likelihood, soon be forced to stop pursuing this nasty and small-minded vendetta of yours.

This is not a pecking order. It is not a hierarchy. You are not Chief Big-um and you do not get to just beat your chest and viciously attack people and thereby make everyone kneel before you and suck up to you.

Some of the mature adults that visit this newsgroup will have none of that sort of nonsense and will not take any of your CRAP, and will make no bones about it either; they will stand right up and tell you to your face that you are an ***. Some people have done so in the past. Others will do so in the future. And I am doing so now.

All your threats, bluster, and nastiness will not make such people go away or cow them into submission, either.

We are not afraid of you!

We are not afraid to tell you to your face that you have the manners of someone raised by wolves!

And we are not afraid to wait until you step over the line and then aggressively seek to get your internet access revoked, or at least cause you to receive a slap on the wrist from your provider along with a stern warning not to let them catch you bullying people, flaming, or otherwise violating newsgroup charters again.

Sorry -- you bit off more than you could chew. You lose. Perhaps if you were here to actually help people, rather than to play the arrogant and churlish know-it-all and thereby inflate your already-hypertrophied ego, then you wouldn't be in this fix. But it may be too late.

A little trick for future reference: cut out any part that you think
goes too off-topic and don't mention that you've dropped it. That
portion will die off very quickly.

Everything posted to this thread since my original question was answered has been off-topic.

Also, if I cut out your personal attacks and outright lies about me and don't say anything about them, you will get your way and people will read your attacks without hearing the other side of the story, and that just won't do at all!

Because pricks are so common in newsgroups. "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all" is a piece of advice that you would do well to familiarize yourself with.

(Joshua had nothing worthwhile to say in response to this.)

See, this is another way in which you and those like you keep erring -- you assume that everyone but you is a neophyte, or perhaps that everyone new to the NEWSGROUP is a neophyte WITH JAVA.

It is much easier to assume that someone is a neophyte when no evidence has been given to the contrary than the other way around

Yes, it is, but it is also wrong, not to mention exceedingly rude.

Likewise, we assume that people haven't bothered to go look something up in the correct places unless they explain that they have.

This is another wrong-headed assumption that results in rudeness.

Furthermore, you are being presumptive and arrogant again here when you incorrectly use the word "we" when describing the execrable way in which YOU happen to behave. WE do not ALL behave like you do! Although, unfortunately, three or four people do.

Questions are very frequently answerable by one of the first 10 results on Google.

What the hell does Google have to do with any of this? This discussion had been about repainting Swing components, and then about the javadocs for Swing components, and then about how horrible a person zerg supposedly is. Google hadn't entered into it.

Google would not have been of much use anyway. Understanding what results are most relevant for a "how do I do X" type of question is AI-complete the last time I'd checked.

The only queries that occur to me are variations on the theme of "JComponent repaint" and the major results for them are just references to the same Sun docs and tutorials I'd been using anyway.

It's called "getting a taste of your own medicine". If you don't enjoy it, stop dishing it out!

I can't recall a time where I snipped someone's response and then complained that the response was worthless

I can recall plenty of times when you have been rude and condescending to me, and a Google search turns up occasions when you have been rude and condescending to a shockingly large number of other people. This has often included snipping entire highly-relevant passages from what they wrote and ignoring them utterly, without even having the courtesy to tell them you were ignoring them.

My snipping some completely irrelevant and pointless dribble and having the courtesy to mention that I trimmed something is not even close to being in the same league of rudeness. Nor have I done so without provocation, right out of the starting gate as it were, the way you have on multiple occasions.

The first time I pointed out that in the real world people sometimes inherit for code reuse (poor practise though that is) you completely ignored that bit and continued on as if I hadn't raised a valid objection to a point you'd tried to raise in support of your theory that I'm a horrible person.

(Joshua continues on to accuse me outright of lying, and to blather some other pointless stuff.)

No, as I have proven earlier, it is you who has lied, about your motives. (See the top of this post for the evidence against your having been truthful about your motives.)

No. Nothing that I have said is wrong, and therefore you have no valid "rebuttals" of anything that I have said. Anything that you claim is such therefore is "nothing worthwhile" for the simple reason that it is factually false.

(Joshua had nothing worthwhile to say in response to this.)

See above. It is incorrect to even try to rebut me. Don't.

"JComponent doesn't override all of Component's methods" -> "It can't because it's not feasible". If that's not a rebuttal, what is it?

It's a rebuttal of something that I never claimed should be the case. I suggested that methods IN OVERLOADED GROUPS, like the repaints, IN VERY BUSY CLASSES, like JComponent, should appear together in the alphabetic listing in the docs, and that barring changes to how the docs are generated the only apparent way to do so was to override any of THOSE PARTICULAR METHODS that were in a superclass with, if no subclass-specific new functionality, just a call to "super" so that the present documentation generator includes them there.

That's a far cry from suggesting that ALL methods in ALL classes should be overridden in ALL subclasses. That is a gross caricature of my position, and your dishonest form of arguing in trying to "prove" that I'm a moron is called a "straw man argument".

If you can't prove that I'm a moron without resorting to dishonest tactics, consider the possibility that it may have something to do with the fact that I AM NOT, ACTUALLY, A MORON.

If, mind you, you're just trying to "prove" that I'm a moron to the general public as a means of attacking me, rather than because you genuinely believe it, then you are being even more dishonest, not to mention acting in bad faith, and you deserve whatever nasty fate awaits you!

when they are over the age of 18

Actually, I'm technically not *over* the age of 18.

Well, THAT explains a great deal. The chest-beating instinct is at its strongest at your age, and maturity is generally still lacking, to boot. I can't help you much with those things. I can do this, though: I can reassure you that you are refreshingly normal. Aside from your mother's complete failure to teach you even the most rudimentary manners! THAT sure isn't normal, at least not where I live.

Which should go to show that you shouldn't make any assumptions.

I didn't make any assumptions about your age, you liar. I said it was rude for you to be condescending to other people when THEY were over the age of 18. That doesn't even assume that all of the OTHER PEOPLE here are over 18; it merely indicates that you are being rude when you treat over-18s like children here, and that you are being rude when you treat random people whose age you don't know and who therefore are PROBABLY over 18 like children here.

In other words, what drew ire was that he stood up for himself when people were rude to him and cast aspersions about him in public. Well, good for him, even if he took it to extremes.

This is what the threads were like:
*Twisted makes a point
Person A: No, I don't think that's valid because...
Twisted: [Snip insult from Person A]

Did you expect that telling Twisted that he (or the things that he wrote) wasn't valid would actually ENDEAR you to him? Big mistake. Most people will not like that sort of treatment, although for whatever reason relatively few will complain out loud.

No one was rude at the beginning. People only got rude when this had gone for some time.

You don't consider telling Twisted that he (or the things that he wrote) wasn't valid to be rude?

I consider any public insinuation to the effect that somebody is stupid, ignorant, missing something important, or etc. to be rude in the extreme. If you hold a negative opinion of someone you should generally keep it to yourself. If you think that what someone says isn't valid, you can politely disagree by saying what YOU think, or you can just let it pass. However, telling them "no, that's not valid" will only get their backs up!

I'm surprised that you have so much difficulty understanding this. It is strange that people seem to get their backs up at the mere asking of a question here. It is NOT strange that people get their backs up when directly and bluntly contradicted in public and treated like a school child being corrected, humiliatingly, in front of the entire class. Either be more diplomatic or keep your mouth shut. Unless, perhaps, you LIKE getting embroiled in debates like this one!

Actually *read* what happened.

And there you go being rude again!

First of all, I skimmed several of the posts. I don't have time to actually READ them, or even skim more than a fraction; Google finds a truly stupendous number of them.

Second of all, you are not in any position to bark orders at me. "Actually *read* foo" is exceptionally nasty and rude and I will not tolerate anything of the sort from anyone, no matter WHAT "tier" he thinks he's on!

Don't talk to me about what happened with this one person until

Don't you ever bark an order at me like this again!

(Another taste of your own medicine. If you don't like it, stop attacking me in public!)

see what happened for yourself, instead of assuming what happened.

I assumed nothing. I read what happened, and in several of the threads it started very similarly to this -- Twisted said something (either asked a question, or actually answered someone else's, something I don't yet feel all that qualified to do, except in the politeness area where I'm clearly more qualified than YOU) and someone jumped down his throat and publicly called him names, or at least flatly rejected paragraphs of what he'd written in a very undiplomatic manner. Commonly, also, as here whoever attacked Twisted was arrogantly certain that if his opinion and Twisted's differed, then Twisted's opinion was wrong, and moreover Twisted was somehow IN the wrong just for daring to post it.

Where things differed was in Twisted's response to this; he would not only call them (sometimes you) on their rudeness and get impatient when instead of backing down they kept browbeating him, but he would also start getting very snippy and insulting himself.

I am taking care not to do so, but I must warn you that my patience with responding calmly and reasonably swear-word-free to being repeatedly publicly attacked is beginning to wear thing. You are getting tiresome, as is Arne. I suggest that you stop now and we agree to disagree on various things, before one of us seriously loses his cool.

Although given your dishonest behavior I suspect that you have no intention of acting in good faith and only wish to damage me now out of what's apparently become a personal vendetta on your part. In which case it will have to be your internet provider that puts a stop to this, by putting a stop to your rampage.

You clearly still have not learned. (See how you like being addressed in such a manner!)

And don't clip

I will clip whatever I damn well please and I will disobey your barked orders whenever I see fit. You have still got to learn that you are not my boss or in any position of authority here whatsoever. You are acting like some sort of wanna-be net.kop. Just listen to yourself! Do this, don't do that, "we" expect everyone to do X and not to do Y!

All I expect, request, or when I find it necessary demand, by way of contrast, is that people be civil to me (and, preferably, to each other more generally) and not pretend to be Grand Poobahs.

I made the statement originally, you misinterpreted it.

No. I did not do anything of the sort, you liar, and I will thank you to stop telling vicious lies about me in public!

Which gives me the right

You do not have the right to be impolite to me or to anyone else. You are nobody! Got that? Nobody! You are just some guy! You aren't even old enough to drink! Where the *** (there, I said it now) do you get off acting like you're some sort of stern-father type with some kind of authority when all you are is A GODDAMN TEENAGER WITH TOO MUCH GODDAMN TESTOSTERONE AND NOT ENOUGH EDUCATION IN MANNERS!

If you believe that people should respect their elders, then I have news for you: I am your elder! I am, in fact, over twice your age. So if you hold any such belief, you had damned well better start apologizing; and if not, you had damned well better stop acting like you're some sort of father-figure here with a special dispensation to be stern and outright rude when someone dares to defy you.

If you neither apologize NOR stop behaving like you own this place, you will be found guilty of hypocrisy beyond any reasonable doubt.

You counted the numbers absolutely

How the hell would you know? I didn't tell you anything about exactly how I counted the numbers. In fact I did use percentages, rather than absolute counts, contrary to your claim here.

And you made no indication that you did.

So instead of either asking, or not bothering your tiny little head about it, you made the most uncharitable assumption possible, viciously attacked me for my supposed error, and then did not even have the good graces to be contrite when it was pointed out that you'd guessed wrong?

Go away and leave me alone. You have NOTHING worthwhile to contribute and you have shown a complete inability a) to treat others as your equals, b) to be well-mannered in public, c) to apologize or admit to error, AND d) to avoid making things personal when someone disagrees with you.

You are not mature enough to post here. Go away.

I also just realized that Andrew and Lew have both been the victims of a NewsMaestro spammer, but I'll assume that you already accounted for that (they became such for telling said spammer that c.l.j.p was not the place to advertise his product).

I rather suspect something else. My theory is that whoever is hacking their posts (and nobody has yet proven that whoever it is is called "NewsMaestro" that I've seen, though perhaps they have where I have NOT seen it) has another motive (or perhaps both motives apply).

I discerned, weeks ago, a pattern to the victims, and that's that they fit a certain profile. That profile involved being arrogant so-and-sos that were casually and gratuitously rude to newcomers and occasionally to other people. This naturally suggested a theory as to motive.

On the basis of that theory as to motive, I predicted that Arne's attitude would land him on the same ***-list either next or at least quite soon.

That has now come to pass more or less right on schedule.

This boosts the credence of my theory substantially, I would say.

I would now suggest that you watch your back -- not a threat, just a warning. I warned Arne similarly, and he didn't listen. Looks like he's now paying the price. You fit the victim profile to a T, and it is very plausible, particularly in light of Arne's fate, that you're next.

then I will decide what opinion of me you broadcast, and it will be "zerg is a great guy"!

(Joshua had nothing worthwhile to say in response to this.)

I am not in a position of public trust nor am I a celebrity. Therefore it is wrong, nevermind rude, to offer publicly a negative opinion of me, and it is an outright violation of tort law to make factually-false unpleasant claims about me, and in particular to falsely accuse me of wrongdoing. Since I am not a public figure, it is sufficient for you to be violating defamation law for you to merely make an unproven, unpleasant assertion about me as if it were fact and not mere opinion.

It is merely extremely rude and morally wrong in the case that it is clear that it IS mere opinion.

Regardless, I do not take kindly to being treated in such a manner. So if you really MUST gossip about someone, gossip about Lindsay Lohan. IN SOME OTHER NEWSGROUP WHERE IT IS ON-CHARTER TO DO SO. Got it?

But I was using "controversial" to mean "holder of controversial opinions and beliefs". This paragraph of yours is, therefore, entirely beside the point.

(Joshua had nothing worthwhile to say in response to this.)

Furthermore, I will never escalate. You have been rude and condescending to me, and outright accused me several times of various bad things;

Never have I called you rude or condescending.

No, instead you have insinuated publicly that I have sub-normal intelligence and various other nastiness.

Never have I shouted at you.

Your barked orders above, e.g. "Read this!", "Don't talk to me until X!", and so forth notwithstanding.

The worst thing that I have said implicitly is "lazy," which is quite frankly a much better attribute than many of the things you have called me in this thread.

But I am not lazy and you ARE arrogant and rude, so yours was still the worse act. You used a mild insult that was also a lie; I used an arguably-stronger insult that happens to be true.

"hurling abuse at people in public can not serve any useful function
and will generally only make things worse"

It has been my experience that this is generally not the case.

That you believe so speaks volumes about you.

Go away.

(Yes, I know one option is simply to ignore the person who started the abuse, but that isn't exactly a good idea if they have begun publicly spouting nasty opinions of you, because then they'll simply be able to continue doing so "behind your back" and get away with it, and THAT certainly won't do you any good.)

I have waded deep into threads with loads of abuse hurled at me all with the simple goal of passing on a nugget of information.

Unfortunately, not all of your "nuggets of information" are neutral statements regarding Java. Some of them are hostile statements about people, and lots of THOSE are undeserved.

I try to follow the primary tenant of my religion, "Do onto others as
you would have them do unto you."

I would submit that you should try harder.

A lot harder.

You certainly have not treated ME as I would have preferred to be treated. Particularly not by butting into a thread where the original question had already been answered with the apparent sole purpose of slinging mud, in public, at one of that thread's participants.

If you read earlier history, you'll notice that I have actually stood up for JSH, in the midst of a whirlwind of abuse, to the disbelief of others (you'll have to look in sci.math as well, as that's where his biggest torturers are).

Token acts of tolerance against a general backdrop of hostility mean nothing.

You must actually treat ALL people with that degree of tolerance, avoid unprovoked namecalling (including by implication), and certainly avoid outright dishonesty before you can be considered to be truly tolerant.

So yes, just ignore a person.

Unfortunately, you and your friends are making that rather difficult for me to do, much as I'd love to, because you continue to badmouth me in public, and each time one of you does that I have to reply to correct the mistaken impressions people might have of me after reading your attacks. I have to continue to tell my side of the story, or else it will not get heard and people may form the mistaken impression that I've conceded your claims, including your unpleasant personal attacks.

If you can suggest a better way of rebutting all of your attacks and those of your "friends in rudeness", and along with that a way to quickly achieve a state of infinite patience so that I can wade through eight or nine abusive nuggets of *** like Arne's in a row without eventually getting churlish back at him, then I'm all ears.

I learned long ago that trying to purposefully direct public opinion
of myself was a fruitless task.

No, now you try to purposefully direct public opinion of ME instead. Hardly a worthy objective.

Fortunately, what I am doing is merely trying to correct lies told about me and tell my side of the story, leaving it to mature and sensible adults to make up their own damn minds but letting them have the facts and not just your side's propaganda and myths.

That is likely to be a far more fruitful task than trying to direct public opinion of anyone by fiat.

And you can take THAT to the bank!

You may think I'm some brutal bully secretly attempting to become the
next Pol Pot

That's a laugh. You're more like the scrawny kid with glasses that was always getting beat up, always smaller and less strong than his attackers, and one day got a modem for his birthday and now gets his rocks off acting like a tough muthafucka on the Internet, pestering and browbeating anyone that rubs him the wrong way and reveling in nobody being bigger and tougher than he is.

At least until he gets a nasty surprise in the form of a complaint from his internet provider about his conduct, and then realizes that though he may no longer be outgunned and now can actually play the bully himself, there is still a hall monitor out there, and still some teachers, and still a detention slip with his name on it.

Oops.

I don't think you are a brutal bully. I think you're pathetic.

Besides, I don't feel one can really judge a person until one actually gets the intimacy equivalent to sitting down and having a debate over coffee or lunch.

This is a remarkable sign of psychological incoherency within you. You say this, yet you presume to judge me (and of course find me wanting) on the basis of a handful of Usenet posts?
.

Loading