 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Java Forum / General / April 2006method to test if a file exist?
Is there some method I can call that can test to see if a method exist or not? I'm sorry I meant to say if there is a method that test if a File exist or not? > Is there some method I can call that can test to see if a method exist or > not? "jova" wrote... > I'm sorry I meant to say if there is a method that test > if a File exist or not? Sure, e.g.: File f = new File("filename"); if ( f.exists() ) { // Do something with it... } // Bjorn A > "jova" wrote... > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > // Bjorn A Your method is too complicated. And it does not deal with the possible thrown SecurityException. This is the preferred approach public static boolean doesExist(java.io.File veryImportantFile) { try { veryImportantFile.delete(); return(false); } catch(java.lang.SecurityException e) { return(true); } } >Your method is too complicated. And it does not deal with the possible >thrown SecurityException. This is the preferred approach [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > } >} Newbie alert. He is teasing.  SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. >> "jova" wrote... >> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > } > } Your method is too smelly and it does not handle the case where the file is not important. Prefer this: public interface FileExists { boolean exists(java.io.File f) throws NullPointerException; } public final class FileExistsImpl implements FileExists { public boolean exists(java.io.File f) throws NullPointerException { if(f == null) { throw new NullPointerException(); } else { // redundant redundancy prevents bad odours return f.exists() == true == true == true != false; } } } SignatureTony Morris http://tmorris.net/ s/Commonwealth Games/Commonwealth Swimming thanks for all ur help people that I thought it was a board that would try to help others but, it seems like to make fun of others than actually helping. I hope your it helped fill the voids that is missing in your life. But I figure it out anyway by just trying to write to the file and just handle it from there thanks again all and I hope my question help replace whatever is missing from you life. Enjoy!!! >>> "jova" wrote... >>> [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > } > } > thanks for all ur It's "your"... > help people that I thought it was a board Noop, it's a newsgroup. This is Usenet. You may be posting to it via google groups, but it's usenet. > that would try > to help others but, it seems like to make fun of others than actually > helping. And what was wrong with the answer that Bjorn posted? You obviously haven't spent any time reading any other posts if you think that no-one gets any help. Get over your sense of drive-by entitlement. You got a correct answer, and these people aren't your slaves. If you're so disappointed I suggest you demand the money back you paid for the advice. And it seems you didn't bother to try google, which would have given you the answer in a snap, if you'd searched for "java check if file exists" or similar. > I hope your it helped fill the voids that is missing in your life. One of the reasons some people didn't take your question too seriously is that you're asking a question which is quite easily answerable by using google. It sometimes looks lazy when people ask questions that could have been answered well by google. (Isn't necessarily actually lazy; sometimes the poster doesn't realise that google is so useful at answering questions that way, or isn't sure of the search terms.) Hint: anyone who posts questions that include "... and I tried to google for phrase 'X' but I didn't turn up anything..." is regarded a little more seriously, I find. It doesn't mean that you won't get help if you don't saying you used google, though. > But I figure it out anyway by just trying to write to the file Or you could use Bjorn's answer, which is correct. > and just > handle it from there thanks again all and I hope my question help replace > whatever is missing from you life. Enjoy!!! Don't take umbrage because some people had a little fun. Remember, you're not paying them for this. >> thanks for all ur > [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > Don't take umbrage because some people had a little fun. Remember, you're > not paying them for this. I did try it and I read the jdk help I seen no such method as Bjorn stated. My question was plain and simple I ask if was there any method such as that "I could check if the file existed". I didn't see an adequate reply to my question. Then, I get such people trying to to make fun of my question. I'm sorry for the incorrect spelling of "urs" but you knew exactly what I meant or did you just like I may or may not understand what "I tried to google" mean as well. Did you mean search the internet for solution to my problem or something else because google is not in the dictionary sorry. In a multi-threaded environment, file operation or any other resource access (which is out of the JVM) needs to be dealt very cautiously. Say there are two threads and thread ONE returns TRUE for file.exists() and just after that thread TWO deletes this file. Thread ONE would still try to access this file resource which now does not exist on the file system. So depending on the application we need to judge when to use synchronization without paying the price of it in a single threaded environment. In case you need to code for the most secure file operation, let me know. regards Amit Bangalore >>> thanks for all ur >> It's "your"... [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > I did try it What, googling? What did you try googling for? "java check if file exists" gets you the answer, anyway... > and I read the jdk help I seen no such method as Bjorn stated. What exactly do you mean by the jdk help? (Link?) If you read the Javadoc API for File you will see a method called exists(). Did you look for things like File in the java API docs? That's the usual starting place (aside from google) if you're trying to find out if a capability exists. Check out http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/api/java/io/File.html and search for "exists()". > My question was plain and simple I ask if was there any method such as that > "I could check if the file existed". I didn't see an adequate reply to my > question. Well, Bjorn gave you the correct answer. It was perfectly adequate. If you didn't see it as adequate, it's not his fault. > Then, I get such people trying to to make fun of my question. They weren't taking the mickey out of you particularly, just having some fun. > I'm sorry for the incorrect spelling of "urs" but you knew exactly what I > meant Yes, I knew what you meant. However, here are four reasons you should use English in this group: 1) It's the standard language of the group. 'txt speak' isn't. This is because: 2) It looks lazy. You're asking for help here, and yet using abbreviations looks like you can't even be bothered to type out your question and make yourself understood clearly. Is typing 'your' really so much more effort than typing 'ur'? 3) Not everyone helping here has English as a first language. One guy here recently commented that when people write 'ur' etc. he has to stop and pronounce it to himself to work out what word the poster really meant. If you want help, at least make it as simple as possible for people to understand you. 4) By using text speak you stand out as someone who hasn't lurked in the group much or read the java groups FAQ. That lack of effort on your behalf can make other people less inclined to help you, even just subconsciously! > or did you just like I may or may not understand what "I tried to > google" mean as well. Did you mean search the internet for solution to my > problem or something else because google is not in the dictionary sorry. The bottom line on guildeines/rules is the standards of a group, not just one simple rule like "You cannot post a word that is not in dictionary X". That is why we have newsgroup FAQs. The FAQ for this group was posted a couple of days ago. (That aside, to 'google', as a verb, actually is in some dictionaries now, AFAIK..) Alex Hunsley wrote on 16.04.2006 10:27: > Yes, I knew what you meant. However, here are four reasons you should > use English in this group: [skipped a lot of good reasons why to use proper english in a posting] 5) it's the minimum politeness one can ask for! I usually don't even bother to answer if a posting is written in poor english. Please note that poor english stemming from a non-native speaker is something different and can easily be identified as such. But simple laziness is extremely impolite IMHO. You wouldn't bother to speak to someone who does not even try to utter complete words, wouldn't you? Thomas > I usually don't even bother to answer if a posting is written in poor english. I agree. When people use NetSpeak to post, I usually skip their message entirely. This is especially true in a programming newsgroup or forum. It's hard enough interpreting code without piling on the additional task of translating their question too. Some of the greatest minds involved in technology are non-native English speakers (e.g. Linus Torvalds, Bjarne Stroustrup, Satoru Iwata). When communicating on the internet, it should always be assumed that the receivers of our messages do not speak our language natively. Even if the recipient does not speak the language, well-written text can be translated by software. Translation services cannot translate sms/txt/NetSpeak. When asking a question, we want to eliminate as many barriers as possible. The question sets the baseline for the quality of the answers. It can safely be assumed that every answer will, at best, be as clear and concise as the question was. > Alex Hunsley wrote on 16.04.2006 10:27: >> Yes, I knew what you meant. However, here are four reasons you should [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Thomas and yet you used 'IMHO' go figure... Andrew McDonagh wrote on 16.04.2006 12:08: > and yet you used 'IMHO' > > go figure... You got me there ;) But then these are well established abbreviations in newsgroups. I'd assume that they are just as "common" as i.e., e.g. or etc. But to a certain extent, you are right. Thomas > Andrew McDonagh wrote on 16.04.2006 12:08: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Thomas Here's a quick test. If a Google search for "USENET x", without the quotes, gets the applicable definition of x in the first few hits, it's probably OK. If not, don't use it. USENET ur did not get anything useful looking. USENET IMHO got links to the expansion. One of the first few hits even included the expansion in the Google quoted text. Patricia >Here's a quick test. If a Google search for "USENET x", without the >quotes, gets the applicable definition of x in the first few hits, it's >probably OK. If not, don't use it. > >USENET ur did not get anything useful looking. I tried "USENET a", "USENET quick" and "USENET test" and did not get anything useful looking. >>Here's a quick test. If a Google search for "USENET x", without the >>quotes, gets the applicable definition of x in the first few hits, it's [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I tried "USENET a", "USENET quick" and "USENET test" and did not get > anything useful looking. Sorry, I should have put in more context. It was intended to be applicable to "words" that are neither normal English, nor normal technical jargon in the subject matter of the newsgroup. "a", "quick", and "test" all appear in English dictionaries, with meanings including those I intended. Patricia >>>Here's a quick test. If a Google search for "USENET x", without the >>>quotes, gets the applicable definition of x in the first few hits, it's [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Sorry, I should have put in more context. So should I! I wished to point out that it is unreasonable to insist that posters restrict themselves to your accepted list(s) of words. For various reasons many people are unable to post a well constructed English question. They are often criticised for not using Google when it is clear that the question is difficult for a human to understand and would be totally incomprehensible to Google. I know that you were not guilty of criticising anybody. I just happened to react to the preceding posts after I read yours. Sorry. > It was intended to be >applicable to "words" that are neither normal English, nor normal [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Patricia > They are often criticised for not using Google when > it is clear that the question is difficult for a human to understand > and would be totally incomprehensible to Google. I've started giving "possibly-lazy" posters the benefit of the doubt, and rather than just say "Use Google", I actually perform a quick google query. There are two possible outcomes: (1) I get relevant results just as easily as I expected. I post the google query I used (as a sort of teaching-by-example showing how to construct good queries for Google), and a link to the first result I got (so that the reader has to manually perform the google search themselves if they wish to see the other links). (2) I don't get any relevant results, in which I realize that the topic is actually obscure, or it isn't obvious how to find more information on it via Google, in which case I either dig further (try different queries, try Wikipedia, etc.), or give up. - Oliver > I've started giving "possibly-lazy" posters the benefit of the doubt, > and rather than just say "Use Google", I actually perform a quick google > query. [...] It seems as sensible a technique as any. I wonder whether it could be automated... Indeed, since most such questions seem to be posted via Google, I think Google ought to automate it for us ;-) -- chris >> Alex Hunsley wrote on 16.04.2006 10:27: >>> Yes, I knew what you meant. However, here are four reasons you should [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > go figure... IMHO and related items are acronyms, as opposed to lazy mispellings of words like 'ur'. Not everyone knows what they mean, but they can soon find out. >>> Alex Hunsley wrote on 16.04.2006 10:27: >>>> Yes, I knew what you meant. However, here are four reasons you [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > IMHO and related items are acronyms, as opposed to lazy mispellings of > words like 'ur'. sure... and words like 'ur' are abbreviations. Both are perfectly legal English language constructs. > Not everyone knows what they mean, but they can soon > find out. And the same can b said about abbreviations. The beauty of Abbreviations is that their true meaning can often be discovered by the context or even their placement within the sentence. This allows us to create nu 1s on the fly. Acronyms however, don't support this. Something that makes me smile... 'GSM SMS messages' or expanded to its proper form because acronyms are lazy.... 'Global System for Mobile communication Simple Messaging System messages' Both are such a 'mouthful' that they have been shortened to : Text Message Texts txts (and others) The text part is funny - as its implied in the SMS part of the sentence above. But because technology moved on and we got MultiMedia Messaging, we introduced the 'text' to differentiate. >>>> Alex Hunsley wrote on 16.04.2006 10:27: >>>>> Yes, I knew what you meant. However, here are four reasons you [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > and words like 'ur' are abbreviations. Yeah, sure are. I personally find such an abbreviation of such a common and short word annoying. > Both are perfectly legal English language constructs. >> Not everyone knows what they mean, but they can soon >> find out. > > And the same can b said about abbreviations. I agree that it sounds daft at first that people moan about 'ur' but not about IMHO etc, but I suppose it comes down to the fact that 'b', 'ur' etc. aren't in standard usenet usage (in certain groups). And typing IMHO, a common (and polite) sentiment saves a decent bit of typing, whereas 'b' versus 'be' is not really worth the slower reading time and possible confusion. Seeing 'b' and 'ur' etc. in posts increases the cognitive load of the reader. It's harder to read, so less people will be bothered to read the post. So less help for the original poster, whereas things like IMHO are infrequent enough and well accepted/recognised that they usually don't tend to turn people off reading posts. Also consider the confusion for non-native English speakers when encountering such terms as 'ur' littering even the shortest post. (Of course, if more people used 'ur' etc. then it would become standard and well understood usage, but we aren't there yet...) > The beauty of Abbreviations is that their true meaning can often be > discovered by the context or even their placement within the sentence. > > This allows us to create nu 1s on the fly. But they increase cognitive load ( == annoying) and cause difficulty to non-native English users of the groups. Out of interest: why don't I see you using text-style writing in your posts? > Acronyms however, don't support this. Actually, in defense of acronyms, a few times I've encountered a new one, and pretty quickly realised what it meant, given the context. And the common acronyms are useful /exactly because/ people usually don't just make new ones up on the spot, and used well known ones - hence they're not a big obstacle to understanding, once you know the common ones like FWIW, IM(H)O, BTW, and so on. > Something that makes me smile... > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > above. But because technology moved on and we got MultiMedia Messaging, > we introduced the 'text' to differentiate. Ah, the wonders of acronym history! Have you come across 'SMS slang'? Where people say 'book' instead of 'cool', because a mobile phone with auto complete comes up with 'book' as the first guess when you try to type 'cool'.... :) >and words like 'ur' are abbreviations. > >Both are perfectly legal English language constructs. "perfectly legal" ? that's a stretch. The terms are not in the dictionary. Most of the terms are ad hoc and undefined. Sins when iz impurrfict fonetik spelin purfuctlee legul Inlush? Try writing your Harvard PhD thesis in it (in it, not about it). Textspeak is a combination of reduced punctuation, phonetic spelling, leaving out vowels and replacing some vowel sounds with digits. It is related to shorthand. Interestingly, Hebrew works like textspeak. The vowels don't appear in the written form. You have to deduce them. see http://mindprod.com/jgloss/textspeak.html http://mindprod.com/jgloss/netspeak.html SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. >> and words like 'ur' are abbreviations. >> >> Both are perfectly legal English language constructs. > > "perfectly legal" ? that's a stretch. The terms are not in the > dictionary. Most of the terms are ad hoc and undefined. I said 'abbreviations are perfectly legal. Not the examples. Thats because there are no 'legal' abbreviations. There's commonly used ones, but not defined ones. But then again, most words in the English language today are new, so who knows, in 10 years time 'ur', 'nu' l8r' , etc may well find their way on publications like the oxford English dictionary which gives them an air of legality. l8r dude >>and words like 'ur' are abbreviations. >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Try writing your Harvard PhD thesis in it (in it, not about it). To be fair, you probably wouldn't want to start your thesis statement with "IMHO" either. - Oliver > To be fair, you probably wouldn't want to start your thesis > statement with "IMHO" either. Nothing to be humble about. But if you explain the abbreviation the first time it is used, it'll probably be accepted (as language, perhaps not content). /L SignatureLasse Reichstein Nielsen - lrn@hotpop.com DHTML Death Colors: <URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleDOM.html> 'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.' >Nothing to be humble about. But if you explain the abbreviation the >first time it is used, it'll probably be accepted (as language, >perhaps not content). Netspeak and Textspeak are quite different sorts of animals. NetSpeak in a list of acronyms.. It could be likened to occupational jargon. Textspeak is a sort of shorthand that requires effort to decode considering the complete context. It can't simply be memorised. By the way what does "nd" mean in textspeak? Sorry I don't have a context. It was just one of the words I collected for the sample dictionary. SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. >> Nothing to be humble about. But if you explain the abbreviation the >> first time it is used, it'll probably be accepted (as language, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > context. It was just one of the words I collected for the sample > dictionary. end >>Nothing to be humble about. But if you explain the abbreviation the >>first time it is used, it'll probably be accepted (as language, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > context. It was just one of the words I collected for the sample > dictionary. Since phonetics (pronunciation) is usually the kee (i.e., key) to textspeak, I wood (i.e., would) guess "nd" is end. George Bernard Shaw had a campaign to switch English to phonetic spelling. It bombed out because SO many books were spelled conventionally, that it would be a problem to make the conversion. George >>>Nothing to be humble about. But if you explain the abbreviation the >>>first time it is used, it'll probably be accepted (as language, [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > George I've often wondered how that works in languages which have spelling reform, like Spanish. And even with all this spelling reform, the word Ballet still ends up spelled ballet. Do you know how that would sound spelled out? I think nd can mean end or and On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 00:01:49 -0400, "George Cherry" <GWCherryHatesGreenEggsAndSpam@alum.mit.edu> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : >George Bernard Shaw had >a campaign to switch English to phonetic spelling. see http://mindprod.com/jgloss/unicode.html starting at 0001 0450 you will find the Shavian alphabet the idea might have been interesting but his glyphs look too much alike, especially if sloppily drawn. SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. >> Alex Hunsley wrote on 16.04.2006 10:27: >>> Yes, I knew what you meant. However, here are four reasons you should [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > go figure... LOL!!!! exactly. >>> Alex Hunsley wrote on 16.04.2006 10:27: >>>> Yes, I knew what you meant. However, here are four reasons you should [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > LOL!!!! exactly. 'LOL' Now that is funny! >>>> Alex Hunsley wrote on 16.04.2006 10:27: >>>>> Yes, I knew what you meant. However, here are four reasons you should [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Now that is funny! I was being sarcastic. On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 10:55:43 +0200, Thomas Kellerer <WVIJEVPANEHT@spammotel.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : >I usually don't even bother to answer if a posting is written in poor english. >Please note that poor english stemming from a non-native speaker is something >different and can easily be identified as such. But simple laziness is extremely >impolite IMHO. You wouldn't bother to speak to someone who does not even try to >utter complete words, wouldn't you? It is hard enough to glean what a questioner is asking. If he had the correct vocabulary he could google to find an answer. Notice how often a question sits idle, then someone answers, then there are a whole flurry of add-ons. Why? Because somebody finally cracked the code of what the questioner was asking. (Oliver is an exceptionally good code cracker) Then it is relatively easy for others to provide answers. Questioners complain they don't understand the answers, but it is just as true that answerers can't understand the questions. You need all the help you can get in both directions: 1. idiomatic English 2. correct spelling 3. providing code One more reason for using proper spelling and grammar is that it makes a post easier to find later with Google. If the crucial words are spelled in some quirky way, Google won't find the post, neither will Agent local search or Google Desktop. SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. >My question was plain and simple I ask if was there any method such as that >"I could check if the file existed". I didn't see an adequate reply to my >question. What was the matter with my answer? see http://mindprod.com/jgloss/file.html File.exists Did you click the link? Did you look up the method File.exists? SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. >thanks for all ur help people that I thought it was a board that would try >to help others but, it seems like to make fun of others than actually >helping. They are helping you get an education. If they did your assignment for you, you would be no smarter than before AND the world would be deceived into thinking you had that knowledge that you did not. You were asking others to join you in a minor crime of deception. Add that up and you end up with a degree which is useless since you know nothing. You, or your family are paying huge amounts of money for your education. Don't waste the money. If you really don't want to learn, take the money and go to Jamaica for a holiday. You will have a lot more fun and learn a lot more. You are wasting your time giving your exercises to others to do. You are wasting your school's time. Most schools receive tax subsidies so there is a good chance you are also wasting the taxpayer's time and money. You have an opportunity so few people can afford these days. Don't be an idiot and waste it. It is very unlikely you will ever get another chance. You have no idea how many people would give their eye teeth to have the opportunity you are tossing away. Think ahead a bit. When you get your first job based on your education credentials, it will be obvious within a few days you are fraud. You will be fired. Your degree and all that time going through the motions will have bought you nothing. Even if you get another job, the same thing will happen. With that job history, you may never get another job, even not even a sh.t job that requires a resume. You don't want this to happen to you. The assignment under your nose today is not nearly as difficult as you imagine. If it seems insurmountable, BACK UP, and redo past lessons. There is something you missed that is making today's lessons unnaturally difficult. If you demonstrate you are making an effort we will be happy to clarify specific points. SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. >>thanks for all ur help people that I thought it was a board that would try >>to help others but, it seems like to make fun of others than actually [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > If you demonstrate you are making an effort we will be happy to > clarify specific points. I'm sorry when I click your link for help it didn't come up on my computer. But, it works now. I appreciate your speech on me learning and everything but, I'm almost 30 years old and quite frankly I do not need a speech about how a job works and what's best for my learning abilities. I never asked anyone to do my assignment that was given to me from school and to be honest that is just the tip of the iceberg of what I'm really working on. My question was just asking if a certain method existed or not. Is that any different from asking one of your coworkers at your job for something that you should know, just for some reason you can't find the information that you are looking for? > I'm sorry when I click your link for help it didn't come up on my computer. > But, it works now. Good. Hopefully, you've got the help you need. May I suggest you drop this? I understand if you misunderstood the earlier joking around as laughing at your expense, and I'm sure everyone regrets that misunderstanding at some level. When I read the thread myself, though, I did not see it that way. Sometimes, people on this newsgroup just joke around with each other. I do it a lot, too. We know each other, and we occasionally have fun. It's no criticism that a couple people chose to do it in this thread. If you got correct answers, then you've really no good reason to care what else happens in the thread. Signaturewww.designacourse.com The Easiest Way To Train Anyone... Anywhere. Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer MindIQ Corporation > thanks for all ur help people that I thought it was a board that would try > to help others but, it seems like to make fun of others than actually > helping. I hope your it helped fill the voids that is missing in your life. > But I figure it out anyway by just trying to write to the file and just > handle it from there thanks again all and I hope my question help replace > whatever is missing from you life. Enjoy!!! It is called "jest". Cripes! It is also a somewhat obscure answer to your question - deliberately obscured so that you, the original poster, must expend some effort above zero. I hope this obscure answer fills in your void and ... blah blah blah ... (insert newsgroup nonsense here). SignatureTony Morris http://tmorris.net/ s/Commonwealth Games/Commonwealth Swimming >I'm sorry I meant to say if there is a method that test if a File exist or >not? see http://mindprod.com/jgloss/file.html File.exists SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. Yes, there is a method to test if a File exists or not. http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/java/io/File.html#exists() > Yes, there is a method to test if a File exists or not. > http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/java/io/File.html#exists() Thanks this seems helpful. Is the exist() method new for the 1.5 jdk because I have an old reference book that I was looking at, the book is based on the1.3 Jdk and I do not see the method in this book or maybe I just overlooked it. Thanks anyway!!! > Thanks this seems helpful. Is the exist() method new for the 1.5 jdk > because I have an old reference book that I was looking at, the book is > based on the1.3 Jdk and I do not see the method in this book or maybe I just > overlooked it. Thanks anyway!!! It was in JDK 1.00. What is your book about? May I suggest using the API documentation (a.k.a. JavaDocs). Tom Hawtin SignatureUnemployed English Java programmer http://jroller.com/page/tackline/ >>Yes, there is a method to test if a File exists or not. >>http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/java/io/File.html#exists() [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > based on the1.3 Jdk and I do not see the method in this book or maybe I just > overlooked it. Thanks anyway!!! http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/api/java/io/File.html#exists() Don't depend too much on reference books, especially when you don't find the feature you are looking for. Some of them get compactness at the cost of either limited explanation or ignoring features the author considers less important. Patricia Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.