Am Mittwoch, 14. August 2002 03:46 schrieb newsham@...:
> >I'm not exactly clear on the motivation for calling class-level member=
> >"static", but it doesn't mean that aren't changeable. A "final" field
> >cannot be changed once it has been assigned a value. A static field
> >differs from one that is not static in that the field is shared by all
> >instances of an object. A static method differs from a normal one in
> >that there is no topical object instance, i.e. "this" reference.
> I never really thought about the origin of the static keyword before yo=
> raised this question. This seems to make sense:
> References to a static member (method or variable) can be resolved at
> class load time ("linkage"). There is no ambiguity as to which member
> is being accessed.
> On the other hand, object methods or variables accessed via an object
> reference must be resolved dynamically to support polymorphism. In the
> first case, the actual method invoked may belong to any
> assignment-compatible class. In the latter case, the actual variable
> accessed may belong to any assignment-compatible object.
Whoa, whoa, whoa!
'final', 'field', 'instances', 'topical', 'linkage', 'object reference',=20
'invoked', 'resolved dynamically to support polymorphism',=20
'assignment-compatible class', 'assignment-compatible object',...
OOP_TermOverloadError in module n00by.brain
*gasp* - I'm gonna meditate over this thread tonight.
I'm happy that I am at least asking the right questions. That's actually =
skill, as I have found out in the recent years. :-)