[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Date Index Thread Index Search archive:
Date:Mon Jun 7 12:40:04 2001 
Subject:Re: Closures and OOP (Was Re: filenames, argument list separators + gsl extension) 
From:Jonathan L Cunningham 
Volume-ID:1010607.03 

On 31 May 2001 12:56:17 GMT, kers@hplb.hpl.hp.com () wrote:

>In article <9f5avq$9ls$1@soapbox.cs.bham.ac.uk>,
>	Aaron.Sloman.XX@cs.bham.ac.uk (Aaron Sloman See text for reply address) writes:
> 
>> I don't know how anonymous classes work in Java, 
(snip)
>> (b) efficiency because global identifiers don't need to be created
>
>Certainly not true for Java classes!

Is that right? I don't know what the output of a Java compiler looks
like, and you do say

>I'm not sure the existing language design and implementation constraints
>(eg it must compile to code that works on the older JVMs) left them
>much room for manoeuver).

so I can believe it, but it is not obvious that an anonymous class
would need a global identifier, so I may be misreading an ambiguity
in what you wrote.

(Or, to put that another way, I bet it is possible to for a
sufficiently clever Java compiler to avoid generating a global name,
for sufficiently large values of "sufficiently clever" :-).

Jonathan


-- 
Jonathan L Cunningham