Is main a valid Java identifier?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
223
down vote

favorite
12












One of my kids is taking Java in high school and had this on one of his tests:




Which of the following is a valid identifier in Java?



a. 123java

b. main

c. java1234

d. {abce

e. )whoot




He answered b and got it wrong.



I looked at the question and argued that main is a valid identifier and that it should have been right.



We took a look at the Java spec for identifiers and it reinforced that point. We also wrote a sample program that had a variable called main, as well as a method. He created a written rebuttal that included the Java documentation reference, the test program and the teacher ignored it and says the answer is still incorrect.



Is main a valid identifier?










share|improve this question



















  • 1




    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    – Samuel Liew♦
    Sep 11 at 23:33






  • 18




    Anecdotal: Your kid might be dealing with a rusted teacher. We recently reformed IT education here nation-wide, and pressure to use new programming languages and ideas lead to many teachers that have been teaching for many years (being rusted in their pre-2000 mindset of programming) simply not being up to the job of teaching modern programming (spreading misinformation such as main is not a valid identifier). I remember my embedded systems teacher trying to get us to sort 100.000 integers on an Arduino (which has 32kB memory). I also prepared a written rebuttal but it was simply ignored.
    – Zimano
    Sep 13 at 10:22







  • 7




    @Zimano, I think its the exact opposite. First year teacher who's major I don't think was CS.
    – Gary Bak
    Sep 13 at 11:17






  • 15




    Was it a single-choice or a multi-choice question? If it was a multi-choice question then b and c should be selected.
    – md2perpe
    Sep 13 at 21:40






  • 11




    @Zimano I can't for the life of me imagine why a "pre-2000 mindset of programming" would change the fact that main is a perfectly valid identifier in Java since 1995.
    – Tobia Tesan
    Sep 14 at 22:36














up vote
223
down vote

favorite
12












One of my kids is taking Java in high school and had this on one of his tests:




Which of the following is a valid identifier in Java?



a. 123java

b. main

c. java1234

d. {abce

e. )whoot




He answered b and got it wrong.



I looked at the question and argued that main is a valid identifier and that it should have been right.



We took a look at the Java spec for identifiers and it reinforced that point. We also wrote a sample program that had a variable called main, as well as a method. He created a written rebuttal that included the Java documentation reference, the test program and the teacher ignored it and says the answer is still incorrect.



Is main a valid identifier?










share|improve this question



















  • 1




    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    – Samuel Liew♦
    Sep 11 at 23:33






  • 18




    Anecdotal: Your kid might be dealing with a rusted teacher. We recently reformed IT education here nation-wide, and pressure to use new programming languages and ideas lead to many teachers that have been teaching for many years (being rusted in their pre-2000 mindset of programming) simply not being up to the job of teaching modern programming (spreading misinformation such as main is not a valid identifier). I remember my embedded systems teacher trying to get us to sort 100.000 integers on an Arduino (which has 32kB memory). I also prepared a written rebuttal but it was simply ignored.
    – Zimano
    Sep 13 at 10:22







  • 7




    @Zimano, I think its the exact opposite. First year teacher who's major I don't think was CS.
    – Gary Bak
    Sep 13 at 11:17






  • 15




    Was it a single-choice or a multi-choice question? If it was a multi-choice question then b and c should be selected.
    – md2perpe
    Sep 13 at 21:40






  • 11




    @Zimano I can't for the life of me imagine why a "pre-2000 mindset of programming" would change the fact that main is a perfectly valid identifier in Java since 1995.
    – Tobia Tesan
    Sep 14 at 22:36












up vote
223
down vote

favorite
12









up vote
223
down vote

favorite
12






12





One of my kids is taking Java in high school and had this on one of his tests:




Which of the following is a valid identifier in Java?



a. 123java

b. main

c. java1234

d. {abce

e. )whoot




He answered b and got it wrong.



I looked at the question and argued that main is a valid identifier and that it should have been right.



We took a look at the Java spec for identifiers and it reinforced that point. We also wrote a sample program that had a variable called main, as well as a method. He created a written rebuttal that included the Java documentation reference, the test program and the teacher ignored it and says the answer is still incorrect.



Is main a valid identifier?










share|improve this question















One of my kids is taking Java in high school and had this on one of his tests:




Which of the following is a valid identifier in Java?



a. 123java

b. main

c. java1234

d. {abce

e. )whoot




He answered b and got it wrong.



I looked at the question and argued that main is a valid identifier and that it should have been right.



We took a look at the Java spec for identifiers and it reinforced that point. We also wrote a sample program that had a variable called main, as well as a method. He created a written rebuttal that included the Java documentation reference, the test program and the teacher ignored it and says the answer is still incorrect.



Is main a valid identifier?







java language-lawyer identifier






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday









Andrew Tobilko

21.3k83875




21.3k83875










asked Sep 10 at 19:57









Gary Bak

2,69231126




2,69231126







  • 1




    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    – Samuel Liew♦
    Sep 11 at 23:33






  • 18




    Anecdotal: Your kid might be dealing with a rusted teacher. We recently reformed IT education here nation-wide, and pressure to use new programming languages and ideas lead to many teachers that have been teaching for many years (being rusted in their pre-2000 mindset of programming) simply not being up to the job of teaching modern programming (spreading misinformation such as main is not a valid identifier). I remember my embedded systems teacher trying to get us to sort 100.000 integers on an Arduino (which has 32kB memory). I also prepared a written rebuttal but it was simply ignored.
    – Zimano
    Sep 13 at 10:22







  • 7




    @Zimano, I think its the exact opposite. First year teacher who's major I don't think was CS.
    – Gary Bak
    Sep 13 at 11:17






  • 15




    Was it a single-choice or a multi-choice question? If it was a multi-choice question then b and c should be selected.
    – md2perpe
    Sep 13 at 21:40






  • 11




    @Zimano I can't for the life of me imagine why a "pre-2000 mindset of programming" would change the fact that main is a perfectly valid identifier in Java since 1995.
    – Tobia Tesan
    Sep 14 at 22:36












  • 1




    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    – Samuel Liew♦
    Sep 11 at 23:33






  • 18




    Anecdotal: Your kid might be dealing with a rusted teacher. We recently reformed IT education here nation-wide, and pressure to use new programming languages and ideas lead to many teachers that have been teaching for many years (being rusted in their pre-2000 mindset of programming) simply not being up to the job of teaching modern programming (spreading misinformation such as main is not a valid identifier). I remember my embedded systems teacher trying to get us to sort 100.000 integers on an Arduino (which has 32kB memory). I also prepared a written rebuttal but it was simply ignored.
    – Zimano
    Sep 13 at 10:22







  • 7




    @Zimano, I think its the exact opposite. First year teacher who's major I don't think was CS.
    – Gary Bak
    Sep 13 at 11:17






  • 15




    Was it a single-choice or a multi-choice question? If it was a multi-choice question then b and c should be selected.
    – md2perpe
    Sep 13 at 21:40






  • 11




    @Zimano I can't for the life of me imagine why a "pre-2000 mindset of programming" would change the fact that main is a perfectly valid identifier in Java since 1995.
    – Tobia Tesan
    Sep 14 at 22:36







1




1




Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Samuel Liew♦
Sep 11 at 23:33




Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Samuel Liew♦
Sep 11 at 23:33




18




18




Anecdotal: Your kid might be dealing with a rusted teacher. We recently reformed IT education here nation-wide, and pressure to use new programming languages and ideas lead to many teachers that have been teaching for many years (being rusted in their pre-2000 mindset of programming) simply not being up to the job of teaching modern programming (spreading misinformation such as main is not a valid identifier). I remember my embedded systems teacher trying to get us to sort 100.000 integers on an Arduino (which has 32kB memory). I also prepared a written rebuttal but it was simply ignored.
– Zimano
Sep 13 at 10:22





Anecdotal: Your kid might be dealing with a rusted teacher. We recently reformed IT education here nation-wide, and pressure to use new programming languages and ideas lead to many teachers that have been teaching for many years (being rusted in their pre-2000 mindset of programming) simply not being up to the job of teaching modern programming (spreading misinformation such as main is not a valid identifier). I remember my embedded systems teacher trying to get us to sort 100.000 integers on an Arduino (which has 32kB memory). I also prepared a written rebuttal but it was simply ignored.
– Zimano
Sep 13 at 10:22





7




7




@Zimano, I think its the exact opposite. First year teacher who's major I don't think was CS.
– Gary Bak
Sep 13 at 11:17




@Zimano, I think its the exact opposite. First year teacher who's major I don't think was CS.
– Gary Bak
Sep 13 at 11:17




15




15




Was it a single-choice or a multi-choice question? If it was a multi-choice question then b and c should be selected.
– md2perpe
Sep 13 at 21:40




Was it a single-choice or a multi-choice question? If it was a multi-choice question then b and c should be selected.
– md2perpe
Sep 13 at 21:40




11




11




@Zimano I can't for the life of me imagine why a "pre-2000 mindset of programming" would change the fact that main is a perfectly valid identifier in Java since 1995.
– Tobia Tesan
Sep 14 at 22:36




@Zimano I can't for the life of me imagine why a "pre-2000 mindset of programming" would change the fact that main is a perfectly valid identifier in Java since 1995.
– Tobia Tesan
Sep 14 at 22:36












11 Answers
11






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
207
down vote



accepted










public class J 
public static void main(String args)

String main = "The character sequence "main" is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.";
System.out.println(main);




This compiles, and when executed, emits this output:



The character sequence "main" is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.


The character sequence main is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.



The relevant section of the JLS is 3.8:




An identifier is an unlimited-length sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which must be a Java letter.



Identifier:



    IdentifierChars but not a Keyword or BooleanLiteral or NullLiteral



IdentifierChars:



    JavaLetter JavaLetterOrDigit



JavaLetter:



    any Unicode character that is a "Java letter"



JavaLetterOrDigit:



    any Unicode character that is a "Java letter-or-digit"




The character sequence main fits the above description and is not in the keyword list in Section 3.9.



(The character sequence java1234 is also an identifier, for the same reasons.)






share|improve this answer






















  • Does it mean OP's child missed out 1 of the 2 good answers?
    – Clockwork
    Sep 13 at 20:19






  • 15




    @Clockwork The question was worded such that only one choice could be correct. However, both choices b and c satisfied the question's condition, inconsistent with the implied choice. This left the OP's child to choose between which correct answer was the one the only one that teacher thought was correct.
    – rgettman
    Sep 13 at 20:30










  • @rgettman I read "Which of the following..." as allowing more than once choice, to which "b and c" would be a valid response.
    – TripeHound
    Sep 14 at 14:38






  • 2




    @TripeHound "is a valid identifier" is singular and demands exactly 1 answer. Compare it to "are valid identifiers"
    – Gimme the 411
    Sep 15 at 22:46











  • You could have made the class main as well ;)
    – Peter Lawrey
    Sep 17 at 7:46

















up vote
73
down vote













main is a valid java identifier, and the teacher is wrong.



The relevant documentation is in the Java Language Specification, right here:



Chapter 3. "Lexical Structure", section 3.8. "Identifiers":



https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se10/html/jls-3.html#jls-3.8



It says:




An identifier is an unlimited-length sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which must be a Java letter... An identifier cannot have the same spelling (Unicode character sequence) as a keyword (§3.9), boolean literal (§3.10.3), or the null literal (§3.10.7), or a compile-time error occurs.




Which means that you can prove that it is a valid identifier by using it as an identifier and observing that no compile-time error occurs.






share|improve this answer


















  • 1




    Could you quote and spell it out more explicitly?
    – zero298
    Sep 10 at 20:03






  • 29




    no, because it is an entire section. If the teacher thinks that this section makes some sort of exception for 'main', it is the teacher who must show where it says so.
    – Mike Nakis
    Sep 10 at 20:04

















up vote
57
down vote













As the other answers state



main is a valid Java identifier, as well as java1234.



I guess the confusing comes from the fact that the main(String) method is often used as entry point by the JVM1. However, that doesn't mean that the token main itself cannot be used as identifier2.



The specs say so, and the following declarations are also valid:




  • A field:



    private int main;



  • A local variable:



    String main = "";



  • A method:



    private void main() ... 



  • A class (although a class name starting with lowercase is discouraged):



    public class main ... 



  • A package:



    package main;



1: As noted in the comments, the JVM specification itself does not mandate any particular method as entry point, but the widely used java tool often uses such a method as entry point.
2: I would generally avoid creating a main method other than main(String).






share|improve this answer


















  • 19




    "I guess the confusing comes from the fact that the main(String) method is used as entry point for the JVM." main isn't the entry point for the JVM. It's the entry point that the java tool uses to run applications. Other tools (servlet containers, for instance) use other entry points.
    – T.J. Crowder
    Sep 11 at 7:48






  • 23




    which is even more ironic, because even in the "entry-point-context" main ALREADY IS a valid identifier. So even the case you could hold against it actually proves OP right
    – Hobbamok
    Sep 11 at 11:42










  • @T.J.Crowder Thanks, I've included that in the answer.
    – MC Emperor
    Sep 11 at 14:21






  • 1




    @Hobbamok You seem confused about basic Java concepts, which probably explains why you teach it in a school and not practicing is the reply that comes to mind
    – rath
    Sep 12 at 9:58






  • 2




    The java tool does not require a main(String) method if the main class extends javafx.application.Application.
    – VGR
    Sep 12 at 18:27

















up vote
47
down vote













This compiles fine on Java 1.8...



public class main 

public String main = "main";

public void main(String main)
System.out.println("This object is an instance of the class " + this.getClass().getCanonicalName());
System.out.println("The value of the argument "main" for this call to the method "main(String main)" is " + main);
System.out.println("The value of the field "main" is " + this.main);


public static void main(String args)
main main = new main();
main.main(main.main + main.main);




...and when executed produces the output:



This object is an instance of the class main
The value of the argument "main" for this call to the method "main(String main)" is mainmain
The value of the field "main" is main





share|improve this answer


















  • 4




    Is it possible to add another static main method with different parameters?
    – jpmc26
    Sep 13 at 1:50






  • 3




    @jpmc26 Try it out and tell us how it went. :)
    – MichaelK
    Sep 13 at 6:06

















up vote
31
down vote













How main could not be used as an identifier while it is used as identifier to declare the "main" method ?



For such a classic idiom :



public class Foo
public static void main(String args)




main is not a keyword and it would probably never be a keyword in Java for obvious retro compatibility reasons.




About the question, is main a good identifier ?



First : valid for a compiler doesn't mean necessarily good.

For example the java1234 option that is proposed is also a valid identifier but that should really be avoided.



main has a very particularly and important meaning : it is used as the entry point method of classes and jars executed by the java command line.

Using main for a method name that doesn't fill the criteria to be used by the java command line would be just misleading while using it as variable name or a class name could make sense.

For example defining the class representing the entry point of an application as the Main class of the application is acceptable and so using it as variable name too such as :



public class Main 

public static void main(String args)
Main main = new Main();
// ...





In a general way, in Java, multiple characters or "words" are considered valid identifiers for the compiler but are strongly discouraged to be used in the client code (but generated code may do that : nested classes for example) as not readable and/or really misleading.



For example this could be valid for the compiler :



public class Object // 1
public void foo()
...



public class BadChosenIdentifier

public static void main() // 2
new BadChosenIdentifier().toString(new Object());


public void toString(Object java1234) // 3, 4
String _result$ = java1234 + " -> to avoid"; // 4
System.out.println(_result$);




But we don't want :



  • to name Object our class as this is defined in java.lang(1).

  • to name a method main() if doesn't fill the criteria to be used by the java command line (2).

  • to overload the Object.toString() method (3).

  • to name our variables with _, $ or any surprising/unmeaningful characters that go against the shared naming conventions (4).





share|improve this answer


















  • 5




    Just to note, main could be a keyword that is only usable as a name for a static method with an appropriate signature (or whatever). Note that super class calls use super in a way that makes it look like an identifier: super(foo); and super.foo, but super IS a keyword (and before generics were added, this was the only way to use it (that I can remember)).
    – jaxad0127
    Sep 10 at 21:33










  • @jaxad0127 Interesting point but I don't agree completely. Actually it IS not and in the future it could probably not be for still compatibility reasons. If you defined main as a keyword in a new version of java, it means that any code that uses main as method name (or any member names) will not compile any longer. The usage of super in generics doesn't have any side effect in existing code as generics didn't exist at this time.
    – davidxxx
    Sep 10 at 21:50






  • 2




    I just meant that it COULD have been done as a keyword. Just because it looks like an identifier, doesn't mean it has to be.
    – jaxad0127
    Sep 10 at 22:01










  • @jaxad0127 Without going too deep into the JLS and for the two cases you mention I think it can be said that super is a special expression: It represents a reference to a Class object to be used with the object's constructor and its members.
    – Gerold Broser
    Sep 12 at 0:57







  • 2




    I would argue that main is still a better identifier than java1234. Using it for a "regular" method would be misleading, but I'd have no problem naming a variable main, if it's actually the main something in my method. java1234 is just awful, names should be descriptive...
    – AJPerez
    Sep 12 at 12:56

















up vote
30
down vote













Is it a valid identifier? Yes.



Is it a good identifier? Not if you're using it for anything other than the method that starts at JVM launch.



Is another valid identifier listed? Yes.



Did the test instructions say to choose the best answer?






share|improve this answer
















  • 5




    Agreed - multiple choice like this are about choosing the 'best' correct answer when there are multiple. However, that doesn't make this a good multiple choice question and I think talking to the teacher about it is the right thing to do.
    – Shadow
    Sep 12 at 3:22






  • 15




    @Shadow This is a programming course. Ambiguity on a question about something that's specified with formal mathematical grammar is intolerable. Speaking strictly against that standard (which is what's implied by "valid"), both answers are equally correct. I can imagine far more cases in which main is a tolerable identifier than I can in which java1234 would be. Consider, for example, a code base working with water supply data (water mains).
    – jpmc26
    Sep 13 at 1:51







  • 1




    @Holger I'm not saying anything. Please note the quotes around the word better. But clearly this instructor thinks so.
    – Shadow
    Sep 13 at 1:55






  • 3




    On the other hand, java1234 stinketh to high heaven as an identifier.
    – Joshua
    Sep 13 at 20:13






  • 2




    "choose the best answer" doesn't mean "figure out when the teacher doesn't know what they're talking about and guess the bad answer they are thinking of." main is not only a valid identifier, it's a very important identifier because every Java application has a main method, and methods are named with identifiers.
    – fluffysheap
    Sep 15 at 10:21

















up vote
27
down vote













I threw everything I could at it, and it appears to work. I'd say main is a valid identifier.



package main;

public class main

static main main;
String Main;

main(String main)
Main = main;


main(main main)
System.out.println(main.Main);


main main(main main)
return new main(main);


public static void main(main...Main)
main:
for (main main : Main)
main = (main instanceof Main) ? new main(main): main.main(main);
break main;



public static void main(String args)
main = new main("main");
main.main(main, main);
main = main.new Main(main)
main main(main main)
return ((Main)main).main();

;
main.main(main);
main.main(main,main);


abstract class Main extends main
Main(main main)
super("main");


main main()
main.Main = "Main";
return main;








share|improve this answer




















  • I like it. Try a 'grep -o main main.java | wc -l'
    – Gary Bak
    Sep 13 at 13:56






  • 2




    That code kinda reminds me of the programming language "ook" ^^ Almost every word in this code is "main" ...
    – Florian Bach
    Sep 14 at 7:50










  • public static void main(main...Main) (missing a space) can't work, can it?
    – Gerold Broser
    Sep 14 at 12:50






  • 2




    I feel like I mainlined it.
    – Ross Presser
    Sep 15 at 0:56

















up vote
20
down vote













main is perfectly valid because it, from the docs:



  1. Is a "sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which is a Java letter"

  2. Is not a keyword

  3. Is not a boolean literal i.e. "true" or "false"

  4. Is not null literal





share|improve this answer



























    up vote
    20
    down vote













    public class Main 
    private static String main;
    public static void main(String main)
    Main.main = main[0];
    new Main().main(Main.main);

    private void main(String main)
    System.out.println(main);







    share|improve this answer



























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      Both main and java123 are valid identifiers, main isn’t a reserved keyword so it’s perfectly acceptable to use, as far as the test goes you should’ve gotten a point or half a point at least.






      share|improve this answer





























        up vote
        0
        down vote













        You can use any word that not a Keyword, Boolean, Null or begins with Number as identifier, The word " main " is the most used identifier, but - in your case - you can use java1234.






        share|improve this answer




















          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
          StackExchange.snippets.init();
          );
          );
          , "code-snippets");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "1"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: false,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f52264638%2fis-main-a-valid-java-identifier%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest






























          11 Answers
          11






          active

          oldest

          votes








          11 Answers
          11






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          207
          down vote



          accepted










          public class J 
          public static void main(String args)

          String main = "The character sequence "main" is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.";
          System.out.println(main);




          This compiles, and when executed, emits this output:



          The character sequence "main" is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.


          The character sequence main is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.



          The relevant section of the JLS is 3.8:




          An identifier is an unlimited-length sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which must be a Java letter.



          Identifier:



              IdentifierChars but not a Keyword or BooleanLiteral or NullLiteral



          IdentifierChars:



              JavaLetter JavaLetterOrDigit



          JavaLetter:



              any Unicode character that is a "Java letter"



          JavaLetterOrDigit:



              any Unicode character that is a "Java letter-or-digit"




          The character sequence main fits the above description and is not in the keyword list in Section 3.9.



          (The character sequence java1234 is also an identifier, for the same reasons.)






          share|improve this answer






















          • Does it mean OP's child missed out 1 of the 2 good answers?
            – Clockwork
            Sep 13 at 20:19






          • 15




            @Clockwork The question was worded such that only one choice could be correct. However, both choices b and c satisfied the question's condition, inconsistent with the implied choice. This left the OP's child to choose between which correct answer was the one the only one that teacher thought was correct.
            – rgettman
            Sep 13 at 20:30










          • @rgettman I read "Which of the following..." as allowing more than once choice, to which "b and c" would be a valid response.
            – TripeHound
            Sep 14 at 14:38






          • 2




            @TripeHound "is a valid identifier" is singular and demands exactly 1 answer. Compare it to "are valid identifiers"
            – Gimme the 411
            Sep 15 at 22:46











          • You could have made the class main as well ;)
            – Peter Lawrey
            Sep 17 at 7:46














          up vote
          207
          down vote



          accepted










          public class J 
          public static void main(String args)

          String main = "The character sequence "main" is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.";
          System.out.println(main);




          This compiles, and when executed, emits this output:



          The character sequence "main" is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.


          The character sequence main is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.



          The relevant section of the JLS is 3.8:




          An identifier is an unlimited-length sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which must be a Java letter.



          Identifier:



              IdentifierChars but not a Keyword or BooleanLiteral or NullLiteral



          IdentifierChars:



              JavaLetter JavaLetterOrDigit



          JavaLetter:



              any Unicode character that is a "Java letter"



          JavaLetterOrDigit:



              any Unicode character that is a "Java letter-or-digit"




          The character sequence main fits the above description and is not in the keyword list in Section 3.9.



          (The character sequence java1234 is also an identifier, for the same reasons.)






          share|improve this answer






















          • Does it mean OP's child missed out 1 of the 2 good answers?
            – Clockwork
            Sep 13 at 20:19






          • 15




            @Clockwork The question was worded such that only one choice could be correct. However, both choices b and c satisfied the question's condition, inconsistent with the implied choice. This left the OP's child to choose between which correct answer was the one the only one that teacher thought was correct.
            – rgettman
            Sep 13 at 20:30










          • @rgettman I read "Which of the following..." as allowing more than once choice, to which "b and c" would be a valid response.
            – TripeHound
            Sep 14 at 14:38






          • 2




            @TripeHound "is a valid identifier" is singular and demands exactly 1 answer. Compare it to "are valid identifiers"
            – Gimme the 411
            Sep 15 at 22:46











          • You could have made the class main as well ;)
            – Peter Lawrey
            Sep 17 at 7:46












          up vote
          207
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          207
          down vote



          accepted






          public class J 
          public static void main(String args)

          String main = "The character sequence "main" is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.";
          System.out.println(main);




          This compiles, and when executed, emits this output:



          The character sequence "main" is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.


          The character sequence main is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.



          The relevant section of the JLS is 3.8:




          An identifier is an unlimited-length sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which must be a Java letter.



          Identifier:



              IdentifierChars but not a Keyword or BooleanLiteral or NullLiteral



          IdentifierChars:



              JavaLetter JavaLetterOrDigit



          JavaLetter:



              any Unicode character that is a "Java letter"



          JavaLetterOrDigit:



              any Unicode character that is a "Java letter-or-digit"




          The character sequence main fits the above description and is not in the keyword list in Section 3.9.



          (The character sequence java1234 is also an identifier, for the same reasons.)






          share|improve this answer














          public class J 
          public static void main(String args)

          String main = "The character sequence "main" is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.";
          System.out.println(main);




          This compiles, and when executed, emits this output:



          The character sequence "main" is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.


          The character sequence main is an identifier, not a keyword or reserved word.



          The relevant section of the JLS is 3.8:




          An identifier is an unlimited-length sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which must be a Java letter.



          Identifier:



              IdentifierChars but not a Keyword or BooleanLiteral or NullLiteral



          IdentifierChars:



              JavaLetter JavaLetterOrDigit



          JavaLetter:



              any Unicode character that is a "Java letter"



          JavaLetterOrDigit:



              any Unicode character that is a "Java letter-or-digit"




          The character sequence main fits the above description and is not in the keyword list in Section 3.9.



          (The character sequence java1234 is also an identifier, for the same reasons.)







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Sep 11 at 4:58









          jeff6times7

          1,522921




          1,522921










          answered Sep 10 at 20:08









          rgettman

          145k21198281




          145k21198281











          • Does it mean OP's child missed out 1 of the 2 good answers?
            – Clockwork
            Sep 13 at 20:19






          • 15




            @Clockwork The question was worded such that only one choice could be correct. However, both choices b and c satisfied the question's condition, inconsistent with the implied choice. This left the OP's child to choose between which correct answer was the one the only one that teacher thought was correct.
            – rgettman
            Sep 13 at 20:30










          • @rgettman I read "Which of the following..." as allowing more than once choice, to which "b and c" would be a valid response.
            – TripeHound
            Sep 14 at 14:38






          • 2




            @TripeHound "is a valid identifier" is singular and demands exactly 1 answer. Compare it to "are valid identifiers"
            – Gimme the 411
            Sep 15 at 22:46











          • You could have made the class main as well ;)
            – Peter Lawrey
            Sep 17 at 7:46
















          • Does it mean OP's child missed out 1 of the 2 good answers?
            – Clockwork
            Sep 13 at 20:19






          • 15




            @Clockwork The question was worded such that only one choice could be correct. However, both choices b and c satisfied the question's condition, inconsistent with the implied choice. This left the OP's child to choose between which correct answer was the one the only one that teacher thought was correct.
            – rgettman
            Sep 13 at 20:30










          • @rgettman I read "Which of the following..." as allowing more than once choice, to which "b and c" would be a valid response.
            – TripeHound
            Sep 14 at 14:38






          • 2




            @TripeHound "is a valid identifier" is singular and demands exactly 1 answer. Compare it to "are valid identifiers"
            – Gimme the 411
            Sep 15 at 22:46











          • You could have made the class main as well ;)
            – Peter Lawrey
            Sep 17 at 7:46















          Does it mean OP's child missed out 1 of the 2 good answers?
          – Clockwork
          Sep 13 at 20:19




          Does it mean OP's child missed out 1 of the 2 good answers?
          – Clockwork
          Sep 13 at 20:19




          15




          15




          @Clockwork The question was worded such that only one choice could be correct. However, both choices b and c satisfied the question's condition, inconsistent with the implied choice. This left the OP's child to choose between which correct answer was the one the only one that teacher thought was correct.
          – rgettman
          Sep 13 at 20:30




          @Clockwork The question was worded such that only one choice could be correct. However, both choices b and c satisfied the question's condition, inconsistent with the implied choice. This left the OP's child to choose between which correct answer was the one the only one that teacher thought was correct.
          – rgettman
          Sep 13 at 20:30












          @rgettman I read "Which of the following..." as allowing more than once choice, to which "b and c" would be a valid response.
          – TripeHound
          Sep 14 at 14:38




          @rgettman I read "Which of the following..." as allowing more than once choice, to which "b and c" would be a valid response.
          – TripeHound
          Sep 14 at 14:38




          2




          2




          @TripeHound "is a valid identifier" is singular and demands exactly 1 answer. Compare it to "are valid identifiers"
          – Gimme the 411
          Sep 15 at 22:46





          @TripeHound "is a valid identifier" is singular and demands exactly 1 answer. Compare it to "are valid identifiers"
          – Gimme the 411
          Sep 15 at 22:46













          You could have made the class main as well ;)
          – Peter Lawrey
          Sep 17 at 7:46




          You could have made the class main as well ;)
          – Peter Lawrey
          Sep 17 at 7:46












          up vote
          73
          down vote













          main is a valid java identifier, and the teacher is wrong.



          The relevant documentation is in the Java Language Specification, right here:



          Chapter 3. "Lexical Structure", section 3.8. "Identifiers":



          https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se10/html/jls-3.html#jls-3.8



          It says:




          An identifier is an unlimited-length sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which must be a Java letter... An identifier cannot have the same spelling (Unicode character sequence) as a keyword (§3.9), boolean literal (§3.10.3), or the null literal (§3.10.7), or a compile-time error occurs.




          Which means that you can prove that it is a valid identifier by using it as an identifier and observing that no compile-time error occurs.






          share|improve this answer


















          • 1




            Could you quote and spell it out more explicitly?
            – zero298
            Sep 10 at 20:03






          • 29




            no, because it is an entire section. If the teacher thinks that this section makes some sort of exception for 'main', it is the teacher who must show where it says so.
            – Mike Nakis
            Sep 10 at 20:04














          up vote
          73
          down vote













          main is a valid java identifier, and the teacher is wrong.



          The relevant documentation is in the Java Language Specification, right here:



          Chapter 3. "Lexical Structure", section 3.8. "Identifiers":



          https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se10/html/jls-3.html#jls-3.8



          It says:




          An identifier is an unlimited-length sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which must be a Java letter... An identifier cannot have the same spelling (Unicode character sequence) as a keyword (§3.9), boolean literal (§3.10.3), or the null literal (§3.10.7), or a compile-time error occurs.




          Which means that you can prove that it is a valid identifier by using it as an identifier and observing that no compile-time error occurs.






          share|improve this answer


















          • 1




            Could you quote and spell it out more explicitly?
            – zero298
            Sep 10 at 20:03






          • 29




            no, because it is an entire section. If the teacher thinks that this section makes some sort of exception for 'main', it is the teacher who must show where it says so.
            – Mike Nakis
            Sep 10 at 20:04












          up vote
          73
          down vote










          up vote
          73
          down vote









          main is a valid java identifier, and the teacher is wrong.



          The relevant documentation is in the Java Language Specification, right here:



          Chapter 3. "Lexical Structure", section 3.8. "Identifiers":



          https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se10/html/jls-3.html#jls-3.8



          It says:




          An identifier is an unlimited-length sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which must be a Java letter... An identifier cannot have the same spelling (Unicode character sequence) as a keyword (§3.9), boolean literal (§3.10.3), or the null literal (§3.10.7), or a compile-time error occurs.




          Which means that you can prove that it is a valid identifier by using it as an identifier and observing that no compile-time error occurs.






          share|improve this answer














          main is a valid java identifier, and the teacher is wrong.



          The relevant documentation is in the Java Language Specification, right here:



          Chapter 3. "Lexical Structure", section 3.8. "Identifiers":



          https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se10/html/jls-3.html#jls-3.8



          It says:




          An identifier is an unlimited-length sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which must be a Java letter... An identifier cannot have the same spelling (Unicode character sequence) as a keyword (§3.9), boolean literal (§3.10.3), or the null literal (§3.10.7), or a compile-time error occurs.




          Which means that you can prove that it is a valid identifier by using it as an identifier and observing that no compile-time error occurs.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Sep 14 at 17:37









          Robert Harvey♦

          145k32264399




          145k32264399










          answered Sep 10 at 20:01









          Mike Nakis

          36k65389




          36k65389







          • 1




            Could you quote and spell it out more explicitly?
            – zero298
            Sep 10 at 20:03






          • 29




            no, because it is an entire section. If the teacher thinks that this section makes some sort of exception for 'main', it is the teacher who must show where it says so.
            – Mike Nakis
            Sep 10 at 20:04












          • 1




            Could you quote and spell it out more explicitly?
            – zero298
            Sep 10 at 20:03






          • 29




            no, because it is an entire section. If the teacher thinks that this section makes some sort of exception for 'main', it is the teacher who must show where it says so.
            – Mike Nakis
            Sep 10 at 20:04







          1




          1




          Could you quote and spell it out more explicitly?
          – zero298
          Sep 10 at 20:03




          Could you quote and spell it out more explicitly?
          – zero298
          Sep 10 at 20:03




          29




          29




          no, because it is an entire section. If the teacher thinks that this section makes some sort of exception for 'main', it is the teacher who must show where it says so.
          – Mike Nakis
          Sep 10 at 20:04




          no, because it is an entire section. If the teacher thinks that this section makes some sort of exception for 'main', it is the teacher who must show where it says so.
          – Mike Nakis
          Sep 10 at 20:04










          up vote
          57
          down vote













          As the other answers state



          main is a valid Java identifier, as well as java1234.



          I guess the confusing comes from the fact that the main(String) method is often used as entry point by the JVM1. However, that doesn't mean that the token main itself cannot be used as identifier2.



          The specs say so, and the following declarations are also valid:




          • A field:



            private int main;



          • A local variable:



            String main = "";



          • A method:



            private void main() ... 



          • A class (although a class name starting with lowercase is discouraged):



            public class main ... 



          • A package:



            package main;



          1: As noted in the comments, the JVM specification itself does not mandate any particular method as entry point, but the widely used java tool often uses such a method as entry point.
          2: I would generally avoid creating a main method other than main(String).






          share|improve this answer


















          • 19




            "I guess the confusing comes from the fact that the main(String) method is used as entry point for the JVM." main isn't the entry point for the JVM. It's the entry point that the java tool uses to run applications. Other tools (servlet containers, for instance) use other entry points.
            – T.J. Crowder
            Sep 11 at 7:48






          • 23




            which is even more ironic, because even in the "entry-point-context" main ALREADY IS a valid identifier. So even the case you could hold against it actually proves OP right
            – Hobbamok
            Sep 11 at 11:42










          • @T.J.Crowder Thanks, I've included that in the answer.
            – MC Emperor
            Sep 11 at 14:21






          • 1




            @Hobbamok You seem confused about basic Java concepts, which probably explains why you teach it in a school and not practicing is the reply that comes to mind
            – rath
            Sep 12 at 9:58






          • 2




            The java tool does not require a main(String) method if the main class extends javafx.application.Application.
            – VGR
            Sep 12 at 18:27














          up vote
          57
          down vote













          As the other answers state



          main is a valid Java identifier, as well as java1234.



          I guess the confusing comes from the fact that the main(String) method is often used as entry point by the JVM1. However, that doesn't mean that the token main itself cannot be used as identifier2.



          The specs say so, and the following declarations are also valid:




          • A field:



            private int main;



          • A local variable:



            String main = "";



          • A method:



            private void main() ... 



          • A class (although a class name starting with lowercase is discouraged):



            public class main ... 



          • A package:



            package main;



          1: As noted in the comments, the JVM specification itself does not mandate any particular method as entry point, but the widely used java tool often uses such a method as entry point.
          2: I would generally avoid creating a main method other than main(String).






          share|improve this answer


















          • 19




            "I guess the confusing comes from the fact that the main(String) method is used as entry point for the JVM." main isn't the entry point for the JVM. It's the entry point that the java tool uses to run applications. Other tools (servlet containers, for instance) use other entry points.
            – T.J. Crowder
            Sep 11 at 7:48






          • 23




            which is even more ironic, because even in the "entry-point-context" main ALREADY IS a valid identifier. So even the case you could hold against it actually proves OP right
            – Hobbamok
            Sep 11 at 11:42










          • @T.J.Crowder Thanks, I've included that in the answer.
            – MC Emperor
            Sep 11 at 14:21






          • 1




            @Hobbamok You seem confused about basic Java concepts, which probably explains why you teach it in a school and not practicing is the reply that comes to mind
            – rath
            Sep 12 at 9:58






          • 2




            The java tool does not require a main(String) method if the main class extends javafx.application.Application.
            – VGR
            Sep 12 at 18:27












          up vote
          57
          down vote










          up vote
          57
          down vote









          As the other answers state



          main is a valid Java identifier, as well as java1234.



          I guess the confusing comes from the fact that the main(String) method is often used as entry point by the JVM1. However, that doesn't mean that the token main itself cannot be used as identifier2.



          The specs say so, and the following declarations are also valid:




          • A field:



            private int main;



          • A local variable:



            String main = "";



          • A method:



            private void main() ... 



          • A class (although a class name starting with lowercase is discouraged):



            public class main ... 



          • A package:



            package main;



          1: As noted in the comments, the JVM specification itself does not mandate any particular method as entry point, but the widely used java tool often uses such a method as entry point.
          2: I would generally avoid creating a main method other than main(String).






          share|improve this answer














          As the other answers state



          main is a valid Java identifier, as well as java1234.



          I guess the confusing comes from the fact that the main(String) method is often used as entry point by the JVM1. However, that doesn't mean that the token main itself cannot be used as identifier2.



          The specs say so, and the following declarations are also valid:




          • A field:



            private int main;



          • A local variable:



            String main = "";



          • A method:



            private void main() ... 



          • A class (although a class name starting with lowercase is discouraged):



            public class main ... 



          • A package:



            package main;



          1: As noted in the comments, the JVM specification itself does not mandate any particular method as entry point, but the widely used java tool often uses such a method as entry point.
          2: I would generally avoid creating a main method other than main(String).







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Sep 13 at 18:43

























          answered Sep 10 at 20:10









          MC Emperor

          7,332115185




          7,332115185







          • 19




            "I guess the confusing comes from the fact that the main(String) method is used as entry point for the JVM." main isn't the entry point for the JVM. It's the entry point that the java tool uses to run applications. Other tools (servlet containers, for instance) use other entry points.
            – T.J. Crowder
            Sep 11 at 7:48






          • 23




            which is even more ironic, because even in the "entry-point-context" main ALREADY IS a valid identifier. So even the case you could hold against it actually proves OP right
            – Hobbamok
            Sep 11 at 11:42










          • @T.J.Crowder Thanks, I've included that in the answer.
            – MC Emperor
            Sep 11 at 14:21






          • 1




            @Hobbamok You seem confused about basic Java concepts, which probably explains why you teach it in a school and not practicing is the reply that comes to mind
            – rath
            Sep 12 at 9:58






          • 2




            The java tool does not require a main(String) method if the main class extends javafx.application.Application.
            – VGR
            Sep 12 at 18:27












          • 19




            "I guess the confusing comes from the fact that the main(String) method is used as entry point for the JVM." main isn't the entry point for the JVM. It's the entry point that the java tool uses to run applications. Other tools (servlet containers, for instance) use other entry points.
            – T.J. Crowder
            Sep 11 at 7:48






          • 23




            which is even more ironic, because even in the "entry-point-context" main ALREADY IS a valid identifier. So even the case you could hold against it actually proves OP right
            – Hobbamok
            Sep 11 at 11:42










          • @T.J.Crowder Thanks, I've included that in the answer.
            – MC Emperor
            Sep 11 at 14:21






          • 1




            @Hobbamok You seem confused about basic Java concepts, which probably explains why you teach it in a school and not practicing is the reply that comes to mind
            – rath
            Sep 12 at 9:58






          • 2




            The java tool does not require a main(String) method if the main class extends javafx.application.Application.
            – VGR
            Sep 12 at 18:27







          19




          19




          "I guess the confusing comes from the fact that the main(String) method is used as entry point for the JVM." main isn't the entry point for the JVM. It's the entry point that the java tool uses to run applications. Other tools (servlet containers, for instance) use other entry points.
          – T.J. Crowder
          Sep 11 at 7:48




          "I guess the confusing comes from the fact that the main(String) method is used as entry point for the JVM." main isn't the entry point for the JVM. It's the entry point that the java tool uses to run applications. Other tools (servlet containers, for instance) use other entry points.
          – T.J. Crowder
          Sep 11 at 7:48




          23




          23




          which is even more ironic, because even in the "entry-point-context" main ALREADY IS a valid identifier. So even the case you could hold against it actually proves OP right
          – Hobbamok
          Sep 11 at 11:42




          which is even more ironic, because even in the "entry-point-context" main ALREADY IS a valid identifier. So even the case you could hold against it actually proves OP right
          – Hobbamok
          Sep 11 at 11:42












          @T.J.Crowder Thanks, I've included that in the answer.
          – MC Emperor
          Sep 11 at 14:21




          @T.J.Crowder Thanks, I've included that in the answer.
          – MC Emperor
          Sep 11 at 14:21




          1




          1




          @Hobbamok You seem confused about basic Java concepts, which probably explains why you teach it in a school and not practicing is the reply that comes to mind
          – rath
          Sep 12 at 9:58




          @Hobbamok You seem confused about basic Java concepts, which probably explains why you teach it in a school and not practicing is the reply that comes to mind
          – rath
          Sep 12 at 9:58




          2




          2




          The java tool does not require a main(String) method if the main class extends javafx.application.Application.
          – VGR
          Sep 12 at 18:27




          The java tool does not require a main(String) method if the main class extends javafx.application.Application.
          – VGR
          Sep 12 at 18:27










          up vote
          47
          down vote













          This compiles fine on Java 1.8...



          public class main 

          public String main = "main";

          public void main(String main)
          System.out.println("This object is an instance of the class " + this.getClass().getCanonicalName());
          System.out.println("The value of the argument "main" for this call to the method "main(String main)" is " + main);
          System.out.println("The value of the field "main" is " + this.main);


          public static void main(String args)
          main main = new main();
          main.main(main.main + main.main);




          ...and when executed produces the output:



          This object is an instance of the class main
          The value of the argument "main" for this call to the method "main(String main)" is mainmain
          The value of the field "main" is main





          share|improve this answer


















          • 4




            Is it possible to add another static main method with different parameters?
            – jpmc26
            Sep 13 at 1:50






          • 3




            @jpmc26 Try it out and tell us how it went. :)
            – MichaelK
            Sep 13 at 6:06














          up vote
          47
          down vote













          This compiles fine on Java 1.8...



          public class main 

          public String main = "main";

          public void main(String main)
          System.out.println("This object is an instance of the class " + this.getClass().getCanonicalName());
          System.out.println("The value of the argument "main" for this call to the method "main(String main)" is " + main);
          System.out.println("The value of the field "main" is " + this.main);


          public static void main(String args)
          main main = new main();
          main.main(main.main + main.main);




          ...and when executed produces the output:



          This object is an instance of the class main
          The value of the argument "main" for this call to the method "main(String main)" is mainmain
          The value of the field "main" is main





          share|improve this answer


















          • 4




            Is it possible to add another static main method with different parameters?
            – jpmc26
            Sep 13 at 1:50






          • 3




            @jpmc26 Try it out and tell us how it went. :)
            – MichaelK
            Sep 13 at 6:06












          up vote
          47
          down vote










          up vote
          47
          down vote









          This compiles fine on Java 1.8...



          public class main 

          public String main = "main";

          public void main(String main)
          System.out.println("This object is an instance of the class " + this.getClass().getCanonicalName());
          System.out.println("The value of the argument "main" for this call to the method "main(String main)" is " + main);
          System.out.println("The value of the field "main" is " + this.main);


          public static void main(String args)
          main main = new main();
          main.main(main.main + main.main);




          ...and when executed produces the output:



          This object is an instance of the class main
          The value of the argument "main" for this call to the method "main(String main)" is mainmain
          The value of the field "main" is main





          share|improve this answer














          This compiles fine on Java 1.8...



          public class main 

          public String main = "main";

          public void main(String main)
          System.out.println("This object is an instance of the class " + this.getClass().getCanonicalName());
          System.out.println("The value of the argument "main" for this call to the method "main(String main)" is " + main);
          System.out.println("The value of the field "main" is " + this.main);


          public static void main(String args)
          main main = new main();
          main.main(main.main + main.main);




          ...and when executed produces the output:



          This object is an instance of the class main
          The value of the argument "main" for this call to the method "main(String main)" is mainmain
          The value of the field "main" is main






          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Sep 11 at 14:24

























          answered Sep 11 at 12:11









          MichaelK

          1,590914




          1,590914







          • 4




            Is it possible to add another static main method with different parameters?
            – jpmc26
            Sep 13 at 1:50






          • 3




            @jpmc26 Try it out and tell us how it went. :)
            – MichaelK
            Sep 13 at 6:06












          • 4




            Is it possible to add another static main method with different parameters?
            – jpmc26
            Sep 13 at 1:50






          • 3




            @jpmc26 Try it out and tell us how it went. :)
            – MichaelK
            Sep 13 at 6:06







          4




          4




          Is it possible to add another static main method with different parameters?
          – jpmc26
          Sep 13 at 1:50




          Is it possible to add another static main method with different parameters?
          – jpmc26
          Sep 13 at 1:50




          3




          3




          @jpmc26 Try it out and tell us how it went. :)
          – MichaelK
          Sep 13 at 6:06




          @jpmc26 Try it out and tell us how it went. :)
          – MichaelK
          Sep 13 at 6:06










          up vote
          31
          down vote













          How main could not be used as an identifier while it is used as identifier to declare the "main" method ?



          For such a classic idiom :



          public class Foo
          public static void main(String args)




          main is not a keyword and it would probably never be a keyword in Java for obvious retro compatibility reasons.




          About the question, is main a good identifier ?



          First : valid for a compiler doesn't mean necessarily good.

          For example the java1234 option that is proposed is also a valid identifier but that should really be avoided.



          main has a very particularly and important meaning : it is used as the entry point method of classes and jars executed by the java command line.

          Using main for a method name that doesn't fill the criteria to be used by the java command line would be just misleading while using it as variable name or a class name could make sense.

          For example defining the class representing the entry point of an application as the Main class of the application is acceptable and so using it as variable name too such as :



          public class Main 

          public static void main(String args)
          Main main = new Main();
          // ...





          In a general way, in Java, multiple characters or "words" are considered valid identifiers for the compiler but are strongly discouraged to be used in the client code (but generated code may do that : nested classes for example) as not readable and/or really misleading.



          For example this could be valid for the compiler :



          public class Object // 1
          public void foo()
          ...



          public class BadChosenIdentifier

          public static void main() // 2
          new BadChosenIdentifier().toString(new Object());


          public void toString(Object java1234) // 3, 4
          String _result$ = java1234 + " -> to avoid"; // 4
          System.out.println(_result$);




          But we don't want :



          • to name Object our class as this is defined in java.lang(1).

          • to name a method main() if doesn't fill the criteria to be used by the java command line (2).

          • to overload the Object.toString() method (3).

          • to name our variables with _, $ or any surprising/unmeaningful characters that go against the shared naming conventions (4).





          share|improve this answer


















          • 5




            Just to note, main could be a keyword that is only usable as a name for a static method with an appropriate signature (or whatever). Note that super class calls use super in a way that makes it look like an identifier: super(foo); and super.foo, but super IS a keyword (and before generics were added, this was the only way to use it (that I can remember)).
            – jaxad0127
            Sep 10 at 21:33










          • @jaxad0127 Interesting point but I don't agree completely. Actually it IS not and in the future it could probably not be for still compatibility reasons. If you defined main as a keyword in a new version of java, it means that any code that uses main as method name (or any member names) will not compile any longer. The usage of super in generics doesn't have any side effect in existing code as generics didn't exist at this time.
            – davidxxx
            Sep 10 at 21:50






          • 2




            I just meant that it COULD have been done as a keyword. Just because it looks like an identifier, doesn't mean it has to be.
            – jaxad0127
            Sep 10 at 22:01










          • @jaxad0127 Without going too deep into the JLS and for the two cases you mention I think it can be said that super is a special expression: It represents a reference to a Class object to be used with the object's constructor and its members.
            – Gerold Broser
            Sep 12 at 0:57







          • 2




            I would argue that main is still a better identifier than java1234. Using it for a "regular" method would be misleading, but I'd have no problem naming a variable main, if it's actually the main something in my method. java1234 is just awful, names should be descriptive...
            – AJPerez
            Sep 12 at 12:56














          up vote
          31
          down vote













          How main could not be used as an identifier while it is used as identifier to declare the "main" method ?



          For such a classic idiom :



          public class Foo
          public static void main(String args)




          main is not a keyword and it would probably never be a keyword in Java for obvious retro compatibility reasons.




          About the question, is main a good identifier ?



          First : valid for a compiler doesn't mean necessarily good.

          For example the java1234 option that is proposed is also a valid identifier but that should really be avoided.



          main has a very particularly and important meaning : it is used as the entry point method of classes and jars executed by the java command line.

          Using main for a method name that doesn't fill the criteria to be used by the java command line would be just misleading while using it as variable name or a class name could make sense.

          For example defining the class representing the entry point of an application as the Main class of the application is acceptable and so using it as variable name too such as :



          public class Main 

          public static void main(String args)
          Main main = new Main();
          // ...





          In a general way, in Java, multiple characters or "words" are considered valid identifiers for the compiler but are strongly discouraged to be used in the client code (but generated code may do that : nested classes for example) as not readable and/or really misleading.



          For example this could be valid for the compiler :



          public class Object // 1
          public void foo()
          ...



          public class BadChosenIdentifier

          public static void main() // 2
          new BadChosenIdentifier().toString(new Object());


          public void toString(Object java1234) // 3, 4
          String _result$ = java1234 + " -> to avoid"; // 4
          System.out.println(_result$);




          But we don't want :



          • to name Object our class as this is defined in java.lang(1).

          • to name a method main() if doesn't fill the criteria to be used by the java command line (2).

          • to overload the Object.toString() method (3).

          • to name our variables with _, $ or any surprising/unmeaningful characters that go against the shared naming conventions (4).





          share|improve this answer


















          • 5




            Just to note, main could be a keyword that is only usable as a name for a static method with an appropriate signature (or whatever). Note that super class calls use super in a way that makes it look like an identifier: super(foo); and super.foo, but super IS a keyword (and before generics were added, this was the only way to use it (that I can remember)).
            – jaxad0127
            Sep 10 at 21:33










          • @jaxad0127 Interesting point but I don't agree completely. Actually it IS not and in the future it could probably not be for still compatibility reasons. If you defined main as a keyword in a new version of java, it means that any code that uses main as method name (or any member names) will not compile any longer. The usage of super in generics doesn't have any side effect in existing code as generics didn't exist at this time.
            – davidxxx
            Sep 10 at 21:50






          • 2




            I just meant that it COULD have been done as a keyword. Just because it looks like an identifier, doesn't mean it has to be.
            – jaxad0127
            Sep 10 at 22:01










          • @jaxad0127 Without going too deep into the JLS and for the two cases you mention I think it can be said that super is a special expression: It represents a reference to a Class object to be used with the object's constructor and its members.
            – Gerold Broser
            Sep 12 at 0:57







          • 2




            I would argue that main is still a better identifier than java1234. Using it for a "regular" method would be misleading, but I'd have no problem naming a variable main, if it's actually the main something in my method. java1234 is just awful, names should be descriptive...
            – AJPerez
            Sep 12 at 12:56












          up vote
          31
          down vote










          up vote
          31
          down vote









          How main could not be used as an identifier while it is used as identifier to declare the "main" method ?



          For such a classic idiom :



          public class Foo
          public static void main(String args)




          main is not a keyword and it would probably never be a keyword in Java for obvious retro compatibility reasons.




          About the question, is main a good identifier ?



          First : valid for a compiler doesn't mean necessarily good.

          For example the java1234 option that is proposed is also a valid identifier but that should really be avoided.



          main has a very particularly and important meaning : it is used as the entry point method of classes and jars executed by the java command line.

          Using main for a method name that doesn't fill the criteria to be used by the java command line would be just misleading while using it as variable name or a class name could make sense.

          For example defining the class representing the entry point of an application as the Main class of the application is acceptable and so using it as variable name too such as :



          public class Main 

          public static void main(String args)
          Main main = new Main();
          // ...





          In a general way, in Java, multiple characters or "words" are considered valid identifiers for the compiler but are strongly discouraged to be used in the client code (but generated code may do that : nested classes for example) as not readable and/or really misleading.



          For example this could be valid for the compiler :



          public class Object // 1
          public void foo()
          ...



          public class BadChosenIdentifier

          public static void main() // 2
          new BadChosenIdentifier().toString(new Object());


          public void toString(Object java1234) // 3, 4
          String _result$ = java1234 + " -> to avoid"; // 4
          System.out.println(_result$);




          But we don't want :



          • to name Object our class as this is defined in java.lang(1).

          • to name a method main() if doesn't fill the criteria to be used by the java command line (2).

          • to overload the Object.toString() method (3).

          • to name our variables with _, $ or any surprising/unmeaningful characters that go against the shared naming conventions (4).





          share|improve this answer














          How main could not be used as an identifier while it is used as identifier to declare the "main" method ?



          For such a classic idiom :



          public class Foo
          public static void main(String args)




          main is not a keyword and it would probably never be a keyword in Java for obvious retro compatibility reasons.




          About the question, is main a good identifier ?



          First : valid for a compiler doesn't mean necessarily good.

          For example the java1234 option that is proposed is also a valid identifier but that should really be avoided.



          main has a very particularly and important meaning : it is used as the entry point method of classes and jars executed by the java command line.

          Using main for a method name that doesn't fill the criteria to be used by the java command line would be just misleading while using it as variable name or a class name could make sense.

          For example defining the class representing the entry point of an application as the Main class of the application is acceptable and so using it as variable name too such as :



          public class Main 

          public static void main(String args)
          Main main = new Main();
          // ...





          In a general way, in Java, multiple characters or "words" are considered valid identifiers for the compiler but are strongly discouraged to be used in the client code (but generated code may do that : nested classes for example) as not readable and/or really misleading.



          For example this could be valid for the compiler :



          public class Object // 1
          public void foo()
          ...



          public class BadChosenIdentifier

          public static void main() // 2
          new BadChosenIdentifier().toString(new Object());


          public void toString(Object java1234) // 3, 4
          String _result$ = java1234 + " -> to avoid"; // 4
          System.out.println(_result$);




          But we don't want :



          • to name Object our class as this is defined in java.lang(1).

          • to name a method main() if doesn't fill the criteria to be used by the java command line (2).

          • to overload the Object.toString() method (3).

          • to name our variables with _, $ or any surprising/unmeaningful characters that go against the shared naming conventions (4).






          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Sep 17 at 7:52

























          answered Sep 10 at 20:10









          davidxxx

          57.2k54278




          57.2k54278







          • 5




            Just to note, main could be a keyword that is only usable as a name for a static method with an appropriate signature (or whatever). Note that super class calls use super in a way that makes it look like an identifier: super(foo); and super.foo, but super IS a keyword (and before generics were added, this was the only way to use it (that I can remember)).
            – jaxad0127
            Sep 10 at 21:33










          • @jaxad0127 Interesting point but I don't agree completely. Actually it IS not and in the future it could probably not be for still compatibility reasons. If you defined main as a keyword in a new version of java, it means that any code that uses main as method name (or any member names) will not compile any longer. The usage of super in generics doesn't have any side effect in existing code as generics didn't exist at this time.
            – davidxxx
            Sep 10 at 21:50






          • 2




            I just meant that it COULD have been done as a keyword. Just because it looks like an identifier, doesn't mean it has to be.
            – jaxad0127
            Sep 10 at 22:01










          • @jaxad0127 Without going too deep into the JLS and for the two cases you mention I think it can be said that super is a special expression: It represents a reference to a Class object to be used with the object's constructor and its members.
            – Gerold Broser
            Sep 12 at 0:57







          • 2




            I would argue that main is still a better identifier than java1234. Using it for a "regular" method would be misleading, but I'd have no problem naming a variable main, if it's actually the main something in my method. java1234 is just awful, names should be descriptive...
            – AJPerez
            Sep 12 at 12:56












          • 5




            Just to note, main could be a keyword that is only usable as a name for a static method with an appropriate signature (or whatever). Note that super class calls use super in a way that makes it look like an identifier: super(foo); and super.foo, but super IS a keyword (and before generics were added, this was the only way to use it (that I can remember)).
            – jaxad0127
            Sep 10 at 21:33










          • @jaxad0127 Interesting point but I don't agree completely. Actually it IS not and in the future it could probably not be for still compatibility reasons. If you defined main as a keyword in a new version of java, it means that any code that uses main as method name (or any member names) will not compile any longer. The usage of super in generics doesn't have any side effect in existing code as generics didn't exist at this time.
            – davidxxx
            Sep 10 at 21:50






          • 2




            I just meant that it COULD have been done as a keyword. Just because it looks like an identifier, doesn't mean it has to be.
            – jaxad0127
            Sep 10 at 22:01










          • @jaxad0127 Without going too deep into the JLS and for the two cases you mention I think it can be said that super is a special expression: It represents a reference to a Class object to be used with the object's constructor and its members.
            – Gerold Broser
            Sep 12 at 0:57







          • 2




            I would argue that main is still a better identifier than java1234. Using it for a "regular" method would be misleading, but I'd have no problem naming a variable main, if it's actually the main something in my method. java1234 is just awful, names should be descriptive...
            – AJPerez
            Sep 12 at 12:56







          5




          5




          Just to note, main could be a keyword that is only usable as a name for a static method with an appropriate signature (or whatever). Note that super class calls use super in a way that makes it look like an identifier: super(foo); and super.foo, but super IS a keyword (and before generics were added, this was the only way to use it (that I can remember)).
          – jaxad0127
          Sep 10 at 21:33




          Just to note, main could be a keyword that is only usable as a name for a static method with an appropriate signature (or whatever). Note that super class calls use super in a way that makes it look like an identifier: super(foo); and super.foo, but super IS a keyword (and before generics were added, this was the only way to use it (that I can remember)).
          – jaxad0127
          Sep 10 at 21:33












          @jaxad0127 Interesting point but I don't agree completely. Actually it IS not and in the future it could probably not be for still compatibility reasons. If you defined main as a keyword in a new version of java, it means that any code that uses main as method name (or any member names) will not compile any longer. The usage of super in generics doesn't have any side effect in existing code as generics didn't exist at this time.
          – davidxxx
          Sep 10 at 21:50




          @jaxad0127 Interesting point but I don't agree completely. Actually it IS not and in the future it could probably not be for still compatibility reasons. If you defined main as a keyword in a new version of java, it means that any code that uses main as method name (or any member names) will not compile any longer. The usage of super in generics doesn't have any side effect in existing code as generics didn't exist at this time.
          – davidxxx
          Sep 10 at 21:50




          2




          2




          I just meant that it COULD have been done as a keyword. Just because it looks like an identifier, doesn't mean it has to be.
          – jaxad0127
          Sep 10 at 22:01




          I just meant that it COULD have been done as a keyword. Just because it looks like an identifier, doesn't mean it has to be.
          – jaxad0127
          Sep 10 at 22:01












          @jaxad0127 Without going too deep into the JLS and for the two cases you mention I think it can be said that super is a special expression: It represents a reference to a Class object to be used with the object's constructor and its members.
          – Gerold Broser
          Sep 12 at 0:57





          @jaxad0127 Without going too deep into the JLS and for the two cases you mention I think it can be said that super is a special expression: It represents a reference to a Class object to be used with the object's constructor and its members.
          – Gerold Broser
          Sep 12 at 0:57





          2




          2




          I would argue that main is still a better identifier than java1234. Using it for a "regular" method would be misleading, but I'd have no problem naming a variable main, if it's actually the main something in my method. java1234 is just awful, names should be descriptive...
          – AJPerez
          Sep 12 at 12:56




          I would argue that main is still a better identifier than java1234. Using it for a "regular" method would be misleading, but I'd have no problem naming a variable main, if it's actually the main something in my method. java1234 is just awful, names should be descriptive...
          – AJPerez
          Sep 12 at 12:56










          up vote
          30
          down vote













          Is it a valid identifier? Yes.



          Is it a good identifier? Not if you're using it for anything other than the method that starts at JVM launch.



          Is another valid identifier listed? Yes.



          Did the test instructions say to choose the best answer?






          share|improve this answer
















          • 5




            Agreed - multiple choice like this are about choosing the 'best' correct answer when there are multiple. However, that doesn't make this a good multiple choice question and I think talking to the teacher about it is the right thing to do.
            – Shadow
            Sep 12 at 3:22






          • 15




            @Shadow This is a programming course. Ambiguity on a question about something that's specified with formal mathematical grammar is intolerable. Speaking strictly against that standard (which is what's implied by "valid"), both answers are equally correct. I can imagine far more cases in which main is a tolerable identifier than I can in which java1234 would be. Consider, for example, a code base working with water supply data (water mains).
            – jpmc26
            Sep 13 at 1:51







          • 1




            @Holger I'm not saying anything. Please note the quotes around the word better. But clearly this instructor thinks so.
            – Shadow
            Sep 13 at 1:55






          • 3




            On the other hand, java1234 stinketh to high heaven as an identifier.
            – Joshua
            Sep 13 at 20:13






          • 2




            "choose the best answer" doesn't mean "figure out when the teacher doesn't know what they're talking about and guess the bad answer they are thinking of." main is not only a valid identifier, it's a very important identifier because every Java application has a main method, and methods are named with identifiers.
            – fluffysheap
            Sep 15 at 10:21














          up vote
          30
          down vote













          Is it a valid identifier? Yes.



          Is it a good identifier? Not if you're using it for anything other than the method that starts at JVM launch.



          Is another valid identifier listed? Yes.



          Did the test instructions say to choose the best answer?






          share|improve this answer
















          • 5




            Agreed - multiple choice like this are about choosing the 'best' correct answer when there are multiple. However, that doesn't make this a good multiple choice question and I think talking to the teacher about it is the right thing to do.
            – Shadow
            Sep 12 at 3:22






          • 15




            @Shadow This is a programming course. Ambiguity on a question about something that's specified with formal mathematical grammar is intolerable. Speaking strictly against that standard (which is what's implied by "valid"), both answers are equally correct. I can imagine far more cases in which main is a tolerable identifier than I can in which java1234 would be. Consider, for example, a code base working with water supply data (water mains).
            – jpmc26
            Sep 13 at 1:51







          • 1




            @Holger I'm not saying anything. Please note the quotes around the word better. But clearly this instructor thinks so.
            – Shadow
            Sep 13 at 1:55






          • 3




            On the other hand, java1234 stinketh to high heaven as an identifier.
            – Joshua
            Sep 13 at 20:13






          • 2




            "choose the best answer" doesn't mean "figure out when the teacher doesn't know what they're talking about and guess the bad answer they are thinking of." main is not only a valid identifier, it's a very important identifier because every Java application has a main method, and methods are named with identifiers.
            – fluffysheap
            Sep 15 at 10:21












          up vote
          30
          down vote










          up vote
          30
          down vote









          Is it a valid identifier? Yes.



          Is it a good identifier? Not if you're using it for anything other than the method that starts at JVM launch.



          Is another valid identifier listed? Yes.



          Did the test instructions say to choose the best answer?






          share|improve this answer












          Is it a valid identifier? Yes.



          Is it a good identifier? Not if you're using it for anything other than the method that starts at JVM launch.



          Is another valid identifier listed? Yes.



          Did the test instructions say to choose the best answer?







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Sep 11 at 16:38









          user1423956

          34922




          34922







          • 5




            Agreed - multiple choice like this are about choosing the 'best' correct answer when there are multiple. However, that doesn't make this a good multiple choice question and I think talking to the teacher about it is the right thing to do.
            – Shadow
            Sep 12 at 3:22






          • 15




            @Shadow This is a programming course. Ambiguity on a question about something that's specified with formal mathematical grammar is intolerable. Speaking strictly against that standard (which is what's implied by "valid"), both answers are equally correct. I can imagine far more cases in which main is a tolerable identifier than I can in which java1234 would be. Consider, for example, a code base working with water supply data (water mains).
            – jpmc26
            Sep 13 at 1:51







          • 1




            @Holger I'm not saying anything. Please note the quotes around the word better. But clearly this instructor thinks so.
            – Shadow
            Sep 13 at 1:55






          • 3




            On the other hand, java1234 stinketh to high heaven as an identifier.
            – Joshua
            Sep 13 at 20:13






          • 2




            "choose the best answer" doesn't mean "figure out when the teacher doesn't know what they're talking about and guess the bad answer they are thinking of." main is not only a valid identifier, it's a very important identifier because every Java application has a main method, and methods are named with identifiers.
            – fluffysheap
            Sep 15 at 10:21












          • 5




            Agreed - multiple choice like this are about choosing the 'best' correct answer when there are multiple. However, that doesn't make this a good multiple choice question and I think talking to the teacher about it is the right thing to do.
            – Shadow
            Sep 12 at 3:22






          • 15




            @Shadow This is a programming course. Ambiguity on a question about something that's specified with formal mathematical grammar is intolerable. Speaking strictly against that standard (which is what's implied by "valid"), both answers are equally correct. I can imagine far more cases in which main is a tolerable identifier than I can in which java1234 would be. Consider, for example, a code base working with water supply data (water mains).
            – jpmc26
            Sep 13 at 1:51







          • 1




            @Holger I'm not saying anything. Please note the quotes around the word better. But clearly this instructor thinks so.
            – Shadow
            Sep 13 at 1:55






          • 3




            On the other hand, java1234 stinketh to high heaven as an identifier.
            – Joshua
            Sep 13 at 20:13






          • 2




            "choose the best answer" doesn't mean "figure out when the teacher doesn't know what they're talking about and guess the bad answer they are thinking of." main is not only a valid identifier, it's a very important identifier because every Java application has a main method, and methods are named with identifiers.
            – fluffysheap
            Sep 15 at 10:21







          5




          5




          Agreed - multiple choice like this are about choosing the 'best' correct answer when there are multiple. However, that doesn't make this a good multiple choice question and I think talking to the teacher about it is the right thing to do.
          – Shadow
          Sep 12 at 3:22




          Agreed - multiple choice like this are about choosing the 'best' correct answer when there are multiple. However, that doesn't make this a good multiple choice question and I think talking to the teacher about it is the right thing to do.
          – Shadow
          Sep 12 at 3:22




          15




          15




          @Shadow This is a programming course. Ambiguity on a question about something that's specified with formal mathematical grammar is intolerable. Speaking strictly against that standard (which is what's implied by "valid"), both answers are equally correct. I can imagine far more cases in which main is a tolerable identifier than I can in which java1234 would be. Consider, for example, a code base working with water supply data (water mains).
          – jpmc26
          Sep 13 at 1:51





          @Shadow This is a programming course. Ambiguity on a question about something that's specified with formal mathematical grammar is intolerable. Speaking strictly against that standard (which is what's implied by "valid"), both answers are equally correct. I can imagine far more cases in which main is a tolerable identifier than I can in which java1234 would be. Consider, for example, a code base working with water supply data (water mains).
          – jpmc26
          Sep 13 at 1:51





          1




          1




          @Holger I'm not saying anything. Please note the quotes around the word better. But clearly this instructor thinks so.
          – Shadow
          Sep 13 at 1:55




          @Holger I'm not saying anything. Please note the quotes around the word better. But clearly this instructor thinks so.
          – Shadow
          Sep 13 at 1:55




          3




          3




          On the other hand, java1234 stinketh to high heaven as an identifier.
          – Joshua
          Sep 13 at 20:13




          On the other hand, java1234 stinketh to high heaven as an identifier.
          – Joshua
          Sep 13 at 20:13




          2




          2




          "choose the best answer" doesn't mean "figure out when the teacher doesn't know what they're talking about and guess the bad answer they are thinking of." main is not only a valid identifier, it's a very important identifier because every Java application has a main method, and methods are named with identifiers.
          – fluffysheap
          Sep 15 at 10:21




          "choose the best answer" doesn't mean "figure out when the teacher doesn't know what they're talking about and guess the bad answer they are thinking of." main is not only a valid identifier, it's a very important identifier because every Java application has a main method, and methods are named with identifiers.
          – fluffysheap
          Sep 15 at 10:21










          up vote
          27
          down vote













          I threw everything I could at it, and it appears to work. I'd say main is a valid identifier.



          package main;

          public class main

          static main main;
          String Main;

          main(String main)
          Main = main;


          main(main main)
          System.out.println(main.Main);


          main main(main main)
          return new main(main);


          public static void main(main...Main)
          main:
          for (main main : Main)
          main = (main instanceof Main) ? new main(main): main.main(main);
          break main;



          public static void main(String args)
          main = new main("main");
          main.main(main, main);
          main = main.new Main(main)
          main main(main main)
          return ((Main)main).main();

          ;
          main.main(main);
          main.main(main,main);


          abstract class Main extends main
          Main(main main)
          super("main");


          main main()
          main.Main = "Main";
          return main;








          share|improve this answer




















          • I like it. Try a 'grep -o main main.java | wc -l'
            – Gary Bak
            Sep 13 at 13:56






          • 2




            That code kinda reminds me of the programming language "ook" ^^ Almost every word in this code is "main" ...
            – Florian Bach
            Sep 14 at 7:50










          • public static void main(main...Main) (missing a space) can't work, can it?
            – Gerold Broser
            Sep 14 at 12:50






          • 2




            I feel like I mainlined it.
            – Ross Presser
            Sep 15 at 0:56














          up vote
          27
          down vote













          I threw everything I could at it, and it appears to work. I'd say main is a valid identifier.



          package main;

          public class main

          static main main;
          String Main;

          main(String main)
          Main = main;


          main(main main)
          System.out.println(main.Main);


          main main(main main)
          return new main(main);


          public static void main(main...Main)
          main:
          for (main main : Main)
          main = (main instanceof Main) ? new main(main): main.main(main);
          break main;



          public static void main(String args)
          main = new main("main");
          main.main(main, main);
          main = main.new Main(main)
          main main(main main)
          return ((Main)main).main();

          ;
          main.main(main);
          main.main(main,main);


          abstract class Main extends main
          Main(main main)
          super("main");


          main main()
          main.Main = "Main";
          return main;








          share|improve this answer




















          • I like it. Try a 'grep -o main main.java | wc -l'
            – Gary Bak
            Sep 13 at 13:56






          • 2




            That code kinda reminds me of the programming language "ook" ^^ Almost every word in this code is "main" ...
            – Florian Bach
            Sep 14 at 7:50










          • public static void main(main...Main) (missing a space) can't work, can it?
            – Gerold Broser
            Sep 14 at 12:50






          • 2




            I feel like I mainlined it.
            – Ross Presser
            Sep 15 at 0:56












          up vote
          27
          down vote










          up vote
          27
          down vote









          I threw everything I could at it, and it appears to work. I'd say main is a valid identifier.



          package main;

          public class main

          static main main;
          String Main;

          main(String main)
          Main = main;


          main(main main)
          System.out.println(main.Main);


          main main(main main)
          return new main(main);


          public static void main(main...Main)
          main:
          for (main main : Main)
          main = (main instanceof Main) ? new main(main): main.main(main);
          break main;



          public static void main(String args)
          main = new main("main");
          main.main(main, main);
          main = main.new Main(main)
          main main(main main)
          return ((Main)main).main();

          ;
          main.main(main);
          main.main(main,main);


          abstract class Main extends main
          Main(main main)
          super("main");


          main main()
          main.Main = "Main";
          return main;








          share|improve this answer












          I threw everything I could at it, and it appears to work. I'd say main is a valid identifier.



          package main;

          public class main

          static main main;
          String Main;

          main(String main)
          Main = main;


          main(main main)
          System.out.println(main.Main);


          main main(main main)
          return new main(main);


          public static void main(main...Main)
          main:
          for (main main : Main)
          main = (main instanceof Main) ? new main(main): main.main(main);
          break main;



          public static void main(String args)
          main = new main("main");
          main.main(main, main);
          main = main.new Main(main)
          main main(main main)
          return ((Main)main).main();

          ;
          main.main(main);
          main.main(main,main);


          abstract class Main extends main
          Main(main main)
          super("main");


          main main()
          main.Main = "Main";
          return main;









          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Sep 13 at 13:22









          18107

          41838




          41838











          • I like it. Try a 'grep -o main main.java | wc -l'
            – Gary Bak
            Sep 13 at 13:56






          • 2




            That code kinda reminds me of the programming language "ook" ^^ Almost every word in this code is "main" ...
            – Florian Bach
            Sep 14 at 7:50










          • public static void main(main...Main) (missing a space) can't work, can it?
            – Gerold Broser
            Sep 14 at 12:50






          • 2




            I feel like I mainlined it.
            – Ross Presser
            Sep 15 at 0:56
















          • I like it. Try a 'grep -o main main.java | wc -l'
            – Gary Bak
            Sep 13 at 13:56






          • 2




            That code kinda reminds me of the programming language "ook" ^^ Almost every word in this code is "main" ...
            – Florian Bach
            Sep 14 at 7:50










          • public static void main(main...Main) (missing a space) can't work, can it?
            – Gerold Broser
            Sep 14 at 12:50






          • 2




            I feel like I mainlined it.
            – Ross Presser
            Sep 15 at 0:56















          I like it. Try a 'grep -o main main.java | wc -l'
          – Gary Bak
          Sep 13 at 13:56




          I like it. Try a 'grep -o main main.java | wc -l'
          – Gary Bak
          Sep 13 at 13:56




          2




          2




          That code kinda reminds me of the programming language "ook" ^^ Almost every word in this code is "main" ...
          – Florian Bach
          Sep 14 at 7:50




          That code kinda reminds me of the programming language "ook" ^^ Almost every word in this code is "main" ...
          – Florian Bach
          Sep 14 at 7:50












          public static void main(main...Main) (missing a space) can't work, can it?
          – Gerold Broser
          Sep 14 at 12:50




          public static void main(main...Main) (missing a space) can't work, can it?
          – Gerold Broser
          Sep 14 at 12:50




          2




          2




          I feel like I mainlined it.
          – Ross Presser
          Sep 15 at 0:56




          I feel like I mainlined it.
          – Ross Presser
          Sep 15 at 0:56










          up vote
          20
          down vote













          main is perfectly valid because it, from the docs:



          1. Is a "sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which is a Java letter"

          2. Is not a keyword

          3. Is not a boolean literal i.e. "true" or "false"

          4. Is not null literal





          share|improve this answer
























            up vote
            20
            down vote













            main is perfectly valid because it, from the docs:



            1. Is a "sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which is a Java letter"

            2. Is not a keyword

            3. Is not a boolean literal i.e. "true" or "false"

            4. Is not null literal





            share|improve this answer






















              up vote
              20
              down vote










              up vote
              20
              down vote









              main is perfectly valid because it, from the docs:



              1. Is a "sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which is a Java letter"

              2. Is not a keyword

              3. Is not a boolean literal i.e. "true" or "false"

              4. Is not null literal





              share|improve this answer












              main is perfectly valid because it, from the docs:



              1. Is a "sequence of Java letters and Java digits, the first of which is a Java letter"

              2. Is not a keyword

              3. Is not a boolean literal i.e. "true" or "false"

              4. Is not null literal






              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered Sep 10 at 20:07









              zero298

              10.9k32854




              10.9k32854




















                  up vote
                  20
                  down vote













                  public class Main 
                  private static String main;
                  public static void main(String main)
                  Main.main = main[0];
                  new Main().main(Main.main);

                  private void main(String main)
                  System.out.println(main);







                  share|improve this answer
























                    up vote
                    20
                    down vote













                    public class Main 
                    private static String main;
                    public static void main(String main)
                    Main.main = main[0];
                    new Main().main(Main.main);

                    private void main(String main)
                    System.out.println(main);







                    share|improve this answer






















                      up vote
                      20
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      20
                      down vote









                      public class Main 
                      private static String main;
                      public static void main(String main)
                      Main.main = main[0];
                      new Main().main(Main.main);

                      private void main(String main)
                      System.out.println(main);







                      share|improve this answer












                      public class Main 
                      private static String main;
                      public static void main(String main)
                      Main.main = main[0];
                      new Main().main(Main.main);

                      private void main(String main)
                      System.out.println(main);








                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered Sep 11 at 10:41









                      kabra.dabar

                      9071815




                      9071815




















                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote













                          Both main and java123 are valid identifiers, main isn’t a reserved keyword so it’s perfectly acceptable to use, as far as the test goes you should’ve gotten a point or half a point at least.






                          share|improve this answer


























                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote













                            Both main and java123 are valid identifiers, main isn’t a reserved keyword so it’s perfectly acceptable to use, as far as the test goes you should’ve gotten a point or half a point at least.






                            share|improve this answer
























                              up vote
                              0
                              down vote










                              up vote
                              0
                              down vote









                              Both main and java123 are valid identifiers, main isn’t a reserved keyword so it’s perfectly acceptable to use, as far as the test goes you should’ve gotten a point or half a point at least.






                              share|improve this answer














                              Both main and java123 are valid identifiers, main isn’t a reserved keyword so it’s perfectly acceptable to use, as far as the test goes you should’ve gotten a point or half a point at least.







                              share|improve this answer














                              share|improve this answer



                              share|improve this answer








                              edited Sep 16 at 11:12









                              Chirag Jain

                              451119




                              451119










                              answered Sep 14 at 15:11









                              shavar

                              14




                              14




















                                  up vote
                                  0
                                  down vote













                                  You can use any word that not a Keyword, Boolean, Null or begins with Number as identifier, The word " main " is the most used identifier, but - in your case - you can use java1234.






                                  share|improve this answer
























                                    up vote
                                    0
                                    down vote













                                    You can use any word that not a Keyword, Boolean, Null or begins with Number as identifier, The word " main " is the most used identifier, but - in your case - you can use java1234.






                                    share|improve this answer






















                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote










                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote









                                      You can use any word that not a Keyword, Boolean, Null or begins with Number as identifier, The word " main " is the most used identifier, but - in your case - you can use java1234.






                                      share|improve this answer












                                      You can use any word that not a Keyword, Boolean, Null or begins with Number as identifier, The word " main " is the most used identifier, but - in your case - you can use java1234.







                                      share|improve this answer












                                      share|improve this answer



                                      share|improve this answer










                                      answered Sep 17 at 9:24









                                      Ahmed Tag Amer

                                      96




                                      96



























                                           

                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded















































                                           


                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function ()
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f52264638%2fis-main-a-valid-java-identifier%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                          );

                                          Post as a guest













































































                                          這個網誌中的熱門文章

                                          Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?

                                          Is there any way to eliminate the singular point to solve this integral by hand or by approximations?

                                          Strongly p-embedded subgroups and p-Sylow subgroups.