final

What is the purpose of the final keyword in C++11 for functions? I understand it prevents function overriding by derived classes, but if this is the case, then isn't it enough to declare as non-virtual your final functions? Is there another thing I'm missing here? What you are missing, as idljarn already mentioned in a comment is that if you are overriding a function from a base class, then you cannot possibly mark it as non-virtual: struct base { virtual void f(); }; struct derived : base { void f() final; // virtual as it overrides base::f }; struct mostderived : derived { //void f(); //

In java, say I have the following ==fileA.java== class A { public static final int SIZE = 100; } Then in another file i use this value ==fileB.java== import A; class b { Object[] temp = new Object[A.SIZE]; } When this gets compiled does SIZE get replaced with the value 100, so that if i were to down the road replace the FileA.jar but not FileB.jar would the object array get the new value or would it have been hardcoded to 100 because thats the value when it was originally built? Thanks, Stephanie Yes, the Java compiler does replace static constant values like SIZE in your example with their

Wikipedia has the following example on the C++11 final modifier: struct Base2 { virtual void f() final; }; struct Derived2 : Base2 { void f(); // ill-formed because the virtual function Base2::f has been marked final }; I don't understand the point of introducing a virtual function and immediately marking it as final. Is this simply a bad example, or is there more to it? Typically final will not be used on the base class' definition of a virtual function. final will be used by a derived class that overrides the function in order to prevent further derived types from further overriding the

is this allowed in java: for(int i=0;i<5;i++){ final int myFinalVariable = i; } The keyword of my question is final . Is it allowed to do a final variable that changes with every run of the loop? I was wondering this because final says that you can't change the value of the variable (calling only myFinalVariable = i ), but i'm redefining the whole variable with final int . Are they two completely different variables just with the same name - with the variable from the previous run of the loop already heading down the road to the garbage collector? Yes, it is allowed. The final keyword means

I am trying to simply test out the initialization safety of final fields as guaranteed by the JLS. It is for a paper I'm writing. However, I am unable to get it to 'fail' based on my current code. Can someone tell me what I'm doing wrong, or if this is just something I have to run over and over again and then see a failure with some unlucky timing? Here is my code: public class TestClass { final int x; int y; static TestClass f; public TestClass() { x = 3; y = 4; } static void writer() { TestClass.f = new TestClass(); } static void reader() { if (TestClass.f != null) { int i = TestClass.f.x; /

What difference that final makes between the code below. Is there any advantage in declaring the arguments as final . public String changeTimezone( Timestamp stamp, Timezone fTz, Timezone toTz){ return .... } public String changeTimezone(final Timestamp stamp, final Timezone fTz, final Timezone toTz){ return .... } PeterMmm As a formal method parameter is a local variable, you can access them from inner anonymous classes only if they are declared as final. This saves you from declaring another local final variable in the method body: void m(final int param) { new Thread(new Runnable() { public