Hi everyone,
I supposed that we can not instantiate interfaces. But the below code refute this.
So why ?
Would you please explain the logic of the following ?
Runnable updateAComponent =new Runnable(){
publicvoid run(){ component.doSomething();}
};
SwingUtilities.invokeLater(updateAComponent);
Another example is that :
ActionListener actionPrinter = new ActionListener() {
public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent e) {
try { pane.getStyledDocument().insertString(0 ,
"Action ["+e.getActionCommand()+"] performed!\n", null);
} catch (Exception ex) { ex.printStackTrace(); }
}
};
> > You're not instantiating an interface. You're
> > instantiating a class (an unnamed, anonymous one)
> > which implements the interface.
>
> How do you know that this class implements the
> interface ?
If its type is declared to be that of the interface, and it implements that interface's methods, then it implements the interface. If it didn't, it wouldn't compile.
> And, I think that using an Anonymous inner class is
> very useful since it provides time efficiency since
> it is easy to write.
> What do you think about that ?
I think it's very shortsighted, because the time you save to write it can easily be eaten up by refactoring work or slower maintenance because of unclear code that results from bad design.
> Do you all agree with me?
It's a by-case decision whether an anonymous inner class is appropriate.
> And, I think that using an Anonymous inner class is very useful since
> it provides time efficiency since it is easy to write.
I'd rather call it convenient for the programmer; no more no less.
But then again, I'm still waiting for that one super duper framework
which exposes just one method: "doItAll()". Now *that's* what I call
convenience ;-)
kind regards,
Jos
> But then again, I'm still waiting for that one super
> duper framework
> which exposes just one method: "doItAll()". Now
> *that's* what I call
> convenience ;-)
>
> kind regards,
>
> Jos
Oh yeah, that's really a good thing to have. I've written such a doItAll(), it works great. It's in my NOOP class.
Yours truly,
df.
> > But then again, I'm still waiting for that one super duper framework
> > which exposes just one method: "doItAll()".
> Oh yeah, that's really a good thing to have. I've written such a doItAll(),
> it works great. It's in my NOOP class.
Just because I'm psychic I happen to know that you are bluffing :-P
And btw, a proper NOOP class doesn't have methods nor fields,
otherwise it should've been named AlmostNOOP; and if it had contained
a real full blown 'doItAll' method it should've been named
AbsolutelyNONOOP. So there.
kind regards,
Jos
> Did something get goofed up in your posts here?
> (confused)
Double-post.
Okey nothing happend
Stop talking about that
-- Raddadi, "[url=http://forum.java.sun.com/thread.jsp?thread=512391&forum=31&start=10&range=1]Reply #10"[/url]
> > Did something get goofed up in your posts here?
> > (confused)
>
> Double-post.
>
> Okey nothing happend
> Stop talking about that
> -- Raddadi,
> "[url=http://forum.java.sun.com/thread.jsp?thread=5123
> 91&forum=31&start=10&range=1]Reply #10"[/url]
I see no double-post here, so you must be right "Okey nothing happend" ;-)
> > Oh yeah, that's really a good thing to have. I've
> written such a doItAll(),
> > it works great. It's in my NOOP class.
>
> Just because I'm psychic I happen to know that you
> are bluffing :-P
Just because I'm empathic I happen to konw that before you put your british motorbike of a psychic capacity into action, you had already guessed I were bluffing, so you should have said "Almost just because I'm psychic blablabla drooldrool".
And if you really were as slow as you pretend to be, a superb display of inertia, your post should have been AbsolutelyNoPostAtAll, not yet at any rate.
So there.
> And btw, a proper NOOP class doesn't have methods nor
> fields,
> otherwise it should've been named AlmostNOOP; and if
> it had contained
> a real full blown 'doItAll' method it should've been
> named
> AbsolutelyNONOOP. So there.
Let's ask UJ. I guess that's a good application of the "Liskov Subsitution Substitution Principle", you know, "the hand is faster than the eye", nudge nudge?
I'm so happy I'll just do it and put ™ everywhere.
Yours truly,
df. (← so there!)
