Printable View
I've seen many code samples on both this forum and on other webpages which use the "this" keyword when calling methods that have been inherited. Is this really necessary?
Here's a code example:
Just a small question which I'm a little perplexed about...Code:public class Example extends JFrame {
public Example() {
setDefaultCloseOperation(JFrame.EXIT_ON_CLOSE); // Both compile and work but does the "this" keyword make any difference?
this.setDefaultCloseOperation(JFrame.EXIT_ON_CLOSE);
}
}
The this keyword refers to the object you are in. As an example, imagine you have the following scenario:
Now, in the constructor, what should happen? Are you assigning the instance variable to the passed in value, or vice versa? This is ambiguous, which you can't have. You can obviously change the variable name in the constructor, but why create another variable name when you can use an existing one?Code:public class Example{
private int x;
public Example(int x){
x = x;
}
}
In the snippet you showed either work, but without the this, ambiguities may arise. It's easier to add this to explicitly show what you are doing.
If this doesn't clear everything up, let me know. Here is the java tutorials as well: Using the this Keyword (The Java™ Tutorials > Learning the Java Language > Classes and Objects)
You will often see something like
Which is generally used when both the object if an action listener and it is something which is getting an action listener attached to it. It explicitly refers to the current object you are working on. When an instance of the object is created the this keyword is referring to that instance explicitly.Code:addActionListener(this);
Thanks for your reply, this has answered my question perfectly! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by sunde887