🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3ab26402$1_1@dnews>, Ralph Quapp <-@?.?> writes
>Hello,
>
>I encountered a compile error in one of my classes when using the statement
>"return super;" and compiling it with javac or jikes. 


 I don't think "super" is properly a value you can return.


 You see, "this" is a truly a reference to [address of] a proper thing,
 the current object.

 However, "super" is a contextual thing that tells you to view
 the nature of THIS object in a different way: when you request
 super.method1() instead of  this.method1(), you specify
 the version of a method OF THIS OBJECT in the superclass
 before you over-rode it in the current class definition...
 not a reference to different object.

 An easy-going compiler will say, "oh he must mean 'this',
 I'll fix it for him."  A more rigorous one will tell you
 that, strictly speaking, 'super' is not a reference to
 some different object  which you could return.



 You may conceivably be doing it to return 'this' cast into
 the type of the superclass....

 class CurClass extends PrvClass {
     PrvClass doSomthing(int x){ .......
         return super;

 Don't do it!      return (PrvClass)this;
 is the proper syntax. 





-- 
   ^-^-^-@@-^-;-^   http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/
        (..)__u     news:alt.smoking.mooses