Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 21:02:10 -0500
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 19:02:01 -0700
From: Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.2; WOW64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.help
Subject: Re: Instantiation of a class
References: <d98a873f-d5db-4243-be26-2109c25744b2@q12g2000prb.googlegroups.com> <ivg9md$c1c$1@dont-email.me>
In-Reply-To: <ivg9md$c1c$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <lcadnRwToZK_NobTnZ2dnUVZ_oudnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 28
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 75.11.53.97
X-Trace: sv3-wgprsHXAmpZwOQzmxh0sQOYz1V50Db0YoTrcUhaWoCFBkT0irwYG6CxxxxheNTOr6MtSchB4e4gGQ4J!7nV4fVrEfTeIRIF2TvCX8aRFYRm5FeNxnmpgqWk1VXnD2CIicfGPjFwOkznJksBikTZ9CtBlFM/v!6TG0PVyFultbT4xNKeR0b9GDQWOWlJrVSm5GZCUgruM=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2028
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.help:849

On 7/11/2011 6:57 PM, Eric Sosman wrote:
> On 7/11/2011 7:03 PM, Fred wrote:
>>
>> I'm thinking about statements like String foo = new String("foo");
>> When is the constructor specified not the name of the type of
>> reference variable?
>
> Aside: The example is sort of silly, because one seldom needs
> two instances of the same String.
>
> At the risk of answering a homework question, I can think of
> two situations in which `x = new Y(...)' works even though x does
> not have type Y. First, x's type may be that of one of Y's
> superclasses, or of an interface implemented by Y. Second, the
> class that's instantiated might not have a name the Java source
> code can speak.
>
> And maybe the gurus will think of additional possibilities.
>

Unboxing:

int x = new Integer(3);

Yuck!

Patricia