Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lew <noone@lewscanon.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: Blocks for scope control
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 11:21:42 -0800
Organization: albasani.net
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <jev907$mi7$1@news.albasani.net>
References: <dBCQq.122$d%2.16@newsfe07.iad> <block-20120115171817@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <9ngdd9Fv6mU1@mid.individual.net> <temporary-names-20120115175901@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.albasani.net dF6wn1I94DM3X643KhHoFNCWAn+xQDv8XYOsiO+fRRHNoopsREMJokX03yxe86rPxGNZr0ZXFD7trOYSNyIjTvTsA/ksWqw6nSLk3iaNaMEzgtHyorz2LKzkc4B21Qii
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 19:21:44 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: news.albasani.net; logging-data="JN6+C9PVrp8Ev3yDPDPp5RsTk/grckRgbLECY7JBvS0/LFVoKCeGqX4v6w9npn+lQ91/1TRUFnRaR8f5rv/eeWkAlhZqvaq7Q8bIfHw4EVNHqoAa//yKSSa7GX+OmoJV"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@albasani.net"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111109 Thunderbird/3.1.16
In-Reply-To: <temporary-names-20120115175901@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mpjALWZNDLvmrfL5QF9hH7+v2Co=
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:11360

Stefan Ram wrote:
> Robert Klemm writes:
>>> { final Button button = new Button(); frame.add( button ); }
>> Why do you think it makes sense to replace this
>> frame.add( new Button() );
>> with the block above?
>
>    This code (comments removed by me):
>
> for (ThumbnailAction thumbAction : chunks) {
>      JButton thumbButton = new JButton(thumbAction);
>      buttonBar.add(thumbButton, buttonBar.getComponentCount() - 1);
> }
>
>    can be found in the renowned Java Tutorial at
>
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/uiswing/components/icon.html
>
>    . So such temporary names for one-time use are not
>    against common teachings.

Some argue, and there's merit in the position, that the one-time name idiom 
enhances code readability over the constructor-in-the-method-argument idiom.

(I also find merit in the "you ought to know Java well enough to read a 
friggin' construction in an argument, for God's sake" argument, for anyone 
claiming remuneration for their Java skills.  Lacking such knowledge and 
charging for your Java skills is fraud if the ignorance is not disclosed up 
front.)

-- 
Lew
Honi soit qui mal y pense.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Friz.jpg