Style question on implementing interfaces

**gbritton** · 08-02-2013, 04:39 PM

I'm studying up on Java multithreading and using the Runnable interface with Swing. Most examples look something like this:

Java Code:

SwingUtilities.invokeLater(new Runnable () {
    public void run () {
         // whatever you need to do 
    }    
});

Is this typical or do some people split out the interface code like this:

Java Code:

Runnable myRunnable = new Runnable () {
    public void run () {
         // whatever you need to do 
    }    
};
SwingUtilities.invokeLater(myRunnable);

I'm just thinking that the second approach is a little easier on the eyes. It reduces indentation and visibly separates the logic, which can be a help, especially if it is non-trivial. For me, coming from a SQL Server background, it's a little like using CTEs instead of subqueries: the end result is the same but the visual separation makes it easier to read.

Your thoughts?

**DarrylBurke** · 08-02-2013, 04:58 PM

There's even a third way (and probably still more): you can define a class that implements Runnable and invokeLater(...) a new instance of that class.

Use whichever style you're comfortable with; the first code snippet may make you a little cross-eyed, but it's something Swing programmers are used to seeing. Usually, the anonymous Runnable's run() implementation has just one line: it invokes a method of the containing class.

In employment, these things are often mandated by the company's coding standards.

db