anonymous-class

In there an internal issue why java anonymous classes cannot implement and subclass at the same time? Or is it just because the syntax? In there an internal issue why java anonymous classes cannot implement and subclass at the same time? I believe it is 99% due to syntactical reasons. Type parameters even support intersection types ( <T extends InterfaceX & InterfaceY> ) so I don't think such feature would introduce any contradictions or complications. An expression like new (InterfaceX & InterfaceY)() { ... } could for instance be compiled into something like interface InterfaceXandY extends

When I tried to do some sample on an abstract class in Java I accidentally got some thing like anonymous inner class in Eclipse. I have pasted the piece of code below. I don't understand how the abstract class is related to anonymous class. package com.Demo; abstract class OuterClass { abstract void OuterClassMethod(); } public abstract class InnerClass extends OuterClass { public static void main(String[] args) { InnerClass myInnerClass = new InnerClass() { @Override void OuterClassMethod() { int OuterClassVariable = 10; System.out.println("OuterClassVariable" + " " + OuterClassVariable); } }

This question already has an answer here: Creating the instance of abstract class or anonymous class 8 answers abstract class Two { Two() { System.out.println("Two()"); } Two(String s) { System.out.println("Two(String"); } abstract int display(); } class One { public Two two(String s) { return new Two() { public int display() { System.out.println("display()"); return 1; } }; } } class Ajay { public static void main(String ...strings ){ One one=new One(); Two two=one.two("ajay"); System.out.println(two.display()); } } we cannot instantiate an abstract class then why is the function Two two

Is there an equivalent syntax or technique for Anonymous class in Swift? Just for clarification Anonymous class in Java example here - http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/javaOO/anonymousclasses.html Thanks! There is no equivalent syntax, as far as I know. Regarding equivalent techniques, theoretically you could use closures and define structs and classes inside them. Sadly, I can't get this to work in a playground or project without making it crash. Most likely this isn't ready to be used in the current beta. Something like... protocol SomeProtocol { func hello() } let closure : () ->

I instantiated an object of an anonymous class to which I added a new method. Date date = new Date() { public void someMethod() {} } I am wondering if it is possible to call this method from outside somehow similar to: date.someMethod(); Good question. Answer is No. You cannot directly call date.someMethod(); Let's understand first what is this. Date date = new Date() { ... }; Above is anonymous(have no name) sub-class which is extending Date class. When you see the code like, Runnable r = new Runnable() { public void run() { } }; It means you have defined anonymous(have no name) class which

Is there a nice way to stop the repetition of task from within the task itself when running in a ScheduledExecutorService? Lets say, I have the following task: Future<?> f = scheduledExecutor.scheduleAtFixedRate(new Runnable() { int count = 0; public void run() { System.out.println(count++); if (count == 10) { // ??? cancel self } } }, 1, 1, TimeUnit.SECONDS); From outside, it is easy to cancel via f.cancel(), but how can I stop the repetition at the specified place? (Passing the Future through an AtomicReference is not safe, because there is a potential window when the scheduleAtFixedRate

I know anonymous classes save typing when it comes to implementing Listener and similar stuff. They try to be a replacement for some usages of closures. But what does the community think about the value of this language-feature? Does it make sense and do you use it regularly? Does it make the code clearer, more understandable and more maintainable? Or do anonymous classes make the code less readable? What is your opinion, and please have examples/arguments handy to support your opinion? I tend to use anonymous inner classes in situations where I don't need to have a full-blown class just to