Win a copy of Beginning Java 17 Fundamentals: Object-Oriented Programming in Java 17 this week in the Java in General forum!
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other Pie Elite all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Tim Cooke
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Ron McLeod
  • Liutauras Vilda
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
Sheriffs:
  • Junilu Lacar
  • Rob Spoor
  • Paul Clapham
Saloon Keepers:
  • Tim Holloway
  • Tim Moores
  • Jesse Silverman
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Carey Brown
Bartenders:
  • Al Hobbs
  • Piet Souris
  • Frits Walraven

Is there a way to shorten System.out.println

 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 215
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi,

Please let me know if there is a shortcut to System.out.println? In certain programs there are lots of these print statements and it would be convenient if I could make it short like println().

 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 125
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Don't use System.out.println, use some Logging framework (Log4j/commons logging)

Cheers
Aneesh
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 308
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
You can shorten until out.println

Use a static import like the following:

 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 2066
IntelliJ IDE Clojure Linux
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Use static import as Nicola said, I think, there is no other way.
 
Sheriff
Posts: 67620
173
Mac Mac OS X IntelliJ IDE jQuery TypeScript Java iOS
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Aneesh Vijendran wrote:Don't use System.out.println, use some Logging framework (Log4j/commons logging)


This!
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 492
Firefox Browser VI Editor Linux
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
If you are just trying to save typing time you could write your own print method using System.out.println().



Hunter
 
Aneesh Vijendran
Ranch Hand
Posts: 125
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
In that case the best option would be: (Assuming log4j/Commons logging and no other frameworks are never written ;) )



 
Hunter McMillen
Ranch Hand
Posts: 492
Firefox Browser VI Editor Linux
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
You are correct, that should have been Object, my mistake.

Hunter
 
John Eipe
Ranch Hand
Posts: 215
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Ok thanks.
 
John Eipe
Ranch Hand
Posts: 215
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I wish there was a macro feature something like

#define PRINT(String x) { System.out.println(x) };

Then I would be able to use PRINT() in my programs.
 
Hunter McMillen
Ranch Hand
Posts: 492
Firefox Browser VI Editor Linux
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
That is exactly what we just did. You just put yours on one-line.




Hunter
 
John Eipe
Ranch Hand
Posts: 215
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Yup you are right. I was thinking using Macros. Maybe Java 7 allows this.
 
Bear Bibeault
Sheriff
Posts: 67620
173
Mac Mac OS X IntelliJ IDE jQuery TypeScript Java iOS
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

John Eipe wrote: Maybe Java 7 allows this.


Good grief, I hope not! Having survived C I can tell you that nothing would open the door for abuse and the creation of completely obtuse and unreadable code more.
 
Hunter McMillen
Ranch Hand
Posts: 492
Firefox Browser VI Editor Linux
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I don't really see much of a difference between macro definitions and defining your own methods? are they not the same?

Hunter
 
Rancher
Posts: 1337
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Programmable editors (like Vim and Emacs) let you define abbreviations, so you type "sop(", and it would automatically be expanded to "System.out.println(". If your editor/IDE doesn't have that function, then a desktop automation tool like TypeIt4Me or QuicKeys might work.
 
John Eipe
Ranch Hand
Posts: 215
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
In Macros, replacement happens wherever the macro function is used. When we use functions each would result in a call. Which add more overhead? I don't know!
 
Hunter McMillen
Ranch Hand
Posts: 492
Firefox Browser VI Editor Linux
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Ok, but that is a function of the editor right? John is suggesting that Java will have macros.


Hunter
 
Bear Bibeault
Sheriff
Posts: 67620
173
Mac Mac OS X IntelliJ IDE jQuery TypeScript Java iOS
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

John Eipe wrote:Which add more overhead? I don't know!


Overhead is generally irrelevant -- what's at issue is code clarity.
 
Author
Posts: 12617
IntelliJ IDE Ruby
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Hunter McMillen wrote:I don't really see much of a difference between macro definitions and defining your own methods? are they not the same?


Yes, they are not the same, particularly C-style macros, which are notoriously easy to abuse and get 100% wrong.
reply
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic