Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bilsch <bilsch01@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: I need a different approach - suggestions please
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 14:44:26 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <jsfuro$h7j$1@dont-email.me>
References: <jsaos3$bht$1@dont-email.me> <jsarei$tfl$1@dont-email.me> <jsatb2$6ki$1@dont-email.me> <jsb265$squ$1@dont-email.me> <jsd4l2$i8s$1@dont-email.me> <jsd95b$e0m$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:44:25 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="SCMsXqyEgNCKlTC+UnaBHg"; logging-data="17651"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1849XzBpbBBd9NXHI9W5J/q"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
In-Reply-To: <jsd95b$e0m$1@dont-email.me>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ke7UNGnYnZID4YCFgPX5CbKU7Dg=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:15680

On 6/26/2012 2:21 PM, Eric Sosman wrote:
> On 6/26/2012 4:04 PM, bilsch wrote:
>> On 6/25/2012 6:10 PM, markspace wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> BTW, another way to improve you code is to watch the big cascades of
>>> if-else statements. For example this:
>>>
>>> if (btn == ".") {strng1 += btn;}
>>> else if (btn == "0") {strng1 += btn;}
>>> else if (btn == "1") {strng1 += btn;}
>>> else if (btn == "2") {strng1 += btn;}
>>> else if (btn == "3") {strng1 += btn;}
>>> else if (btn == "4") {strng1 += btn;}
>>> else if (btn == "5") {strng1 += btn;}
>>> else if (btn == "6") {strng1 += btn;}
>>> else if (btn == "7") {strng1 += btn;}
>>> else if (btn == "8") {strng1 += btn;}
>>> else if (btn == "9") {strng1 += btn;}
>>>
>>> could all just be
>>>
>>> strng1 += btn;
>>>
>>> because you don't do anything different for the different cases.
>>> Copy-paste statement like this should be avoid, because it creates
>>> relatively low value redundancy. Try to combine common cases into one
>>> block. It's easier to go back and modify later.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Now that you mention it I see how that would work. However the actual
>> program has many non-numeric buttons I don't want in the string - I
>> better leave that alone for the present.
>
> You needn't use the same listener for the 7 key as for
> the Backspace key ...
>
The listeners all call a statement in the second file:

public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent event)

so I don't understand how a button listener can be different from 
another button listener.

Could you explain please?

TIA   Bill S.