I'm not 100% certain about this, but I think you might be bending the
JLS a little bit in what you're trying to do.... I remember there being
a _recommended_ but not _required_ notation recommended for compilers
in the inner class specs... something like this$1 to access the enclosing
object, and this$2 to access it's enclosing object, etc... (I may have
them numbered backwards... I do remember at the time I read it that this
seemed a bass-akwards way of numbering.) You might want to do some
introspection or disassembly of classes/innerclasses your compiler
generates and see what kinds of private-static-final fields it creates
under the covers for you. I also seem to remember that super() isn't a
real method... just syntax to tell the compiler to replace the standard
call to superclass's null arg ctor with a call to a specific argument
list ctor in your _immediate_superclass_. -=Chris
At 10:43 AM 5/1/99 -0400, Michael Emmel wrote:
>
>To extend my own question I think this is a bug since thre is no way
>for a programmer to intialize the enclsing instance variable.
>I think that Object should have a methos added.
[snip]
!NEW!-=> <*> cabbey at home dot net http://members.home.net/cabbey/ <*>
"What can Microsoft do? They certainly can't program around us." - Linus
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version:3.12 http://www.geekcode.com
GCS$/IT/PA$ d(-) s++:+ a-- C+++$ UL++++ UA++$ P++ L++ E- W++ N+ o? K? !P
w---(+)$ O- M-- V-- Y+ PGP+ t--- 5++ X+ R tv b+ DI+++ D G e++ h(+) r@ y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
