Forcing local scoping

Thread view:

Joe Seigh - 04 Feb 2007 21:30 GMT

Is there any way of forcing local scoping that's a little cleaner
than using an anonymous inner class? I need to be able to enforce
some before entering block and after entering block actions.
Anonymous inner classes seem a little kludgy.

Signature

Joe Seigh

When you get lemons, you make lemonade.
When you get hardware, you make software.

Reply to this Message

Tom Hawtin - 04 Feb 2007 21:42 GMT

> Is there any way of forcing local scoping that's a little cleaner
> than using an anonymous inner class? I need to be able to enforce
> some before entering block and after entering block actions.
> Anonymous inner classes seem a little kludgy.

I don't think they are a kludge (well other than the implementation into
the class file format). It's just the syntax is highly verbose for a
simple ExecuteAround.

You could generate a proxy for appropriately annotated methods, but that
would be even more of a kludge.

Tom Hawtin

Reply to this Message

Joe Seigh - 05 Feb 2007 11:01 GMT

>> Is there any way of forcing local scoping that's a little cleaner
>> than using an anonymous inner class? I need to be able to enforce
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> You could generate a proxy for appropriately annotated methods, but that
> would be even more of a kludge.

Plus it's not really a block but a method call so you lose local variable
scoping. Ah well, I'll probably just go with requiring the user to use
enter and exit block actions in a try/finally block. Thanks anyway.

Signature

Joe Seigh

When you get lemons, you make lemonade.
When you get hardware, you make software.

Reply to this Message

Forcing local scoping

Free Magazines