My own preference would be for the first approach. I'm a fan of code that is as obvious in meaning as possible. The first approach tells me pretty clearly that I'm referencing a field of the MyInterface class, the only question I have to answer then is if it's a static field or if MyInterface is actually a poorly-named instance of something. In the second approach, I could be dealing with a local variable, a class member, or something inherited. The difference isn't severe I think, but the first seems just slightly more intuitive, and that's always a good thing to me.
-- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com
Carl Smith wrote:
In Java, sometimes you would define an interface containg the constants:
public interface MyInterface {
public static final String YES = "yes";
}
To access the contants, there are two ways
public class WayOne {
public void myMethod(){
String yes = MyInterface.YES;
//...
}
}
public class WayTwo implements MyInterface {
public void myMethod(){
String yes = YES;
//...
}
}
I am asking which one is better? Or they are Ok and depend on the developer 's flavor?
signature --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
