interface vs. extending

[mtrembla@xxxxxxxxxxx (Marc Tremblay)]

You'd have to try it, I doubt it would be noticeable.  I would tend to
choose the best design for my situation.  A good OO design should really
come first.  Also, if performance is extremely critical maybe Java isn't
the best environment for the solution.  However, I find Java to be more
than fast enough for everything I've tried to get it to do these days.

-- Marc

At 10:13 AM 9/30/99 -0700, Howard Lee wrote:
>Thanks Marc. What about Abstract class and Interface then? Which one's more
>expensive? Thanks.
>
>>
>> Extending a superclass it at least as expensive as implementing an
>> interface in that you'll never construct the interface but you'll have to
>> construct any superclasses (not seperate instances, just the
>> super() calls)
>> when constructing the subclass.  I would think the difference would be
>> negligible though.
>>
>> If you don't need member fields or private implementation functions than I
>> would say go for the interface as it's a more flexible approach.
>> Otherwise
>> look at using an abstract class.
>>
>> -- Marc
>>
>> At 09:07 AM 9/30/99 -0700, Howard Lee wrote:
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >Which one is more expensive? Implementing an interface or
>> extending a super
>> >class that just contains method signatures? Thanks.
>> >
>> >Howard
>> >
>> >
>> >---
>> >To unsubscribe, mail advanced-java-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >To get help, mail advanced-java-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>> Marc Tremblay
>> Web Programer
>> EyeWire Inc.
>> http://www.eyewire.com/
>>
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe, mail advanced-java-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> To get help, mail advanced-java-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>


Marc Tremblay
Web Programer
EyeWire Inc.
http://www.eyewire.com/


---
To unsubscribe, mail advanced-java-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To get help, mail advanced-java-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx