Create Objects Question

Question

Hi. Just curios.
Lets say I have a class called MyClass. In that class I have an method called myMethod()
I then create an Object of that with.
MyClass mc = new MyClass();
mc.myMethod(); Is that better then to do
new MyClass().myMethod()What I think is the difference.
1 with the first example I create an Object that stays "alive"
2 in the second example the Object dies when myMethod() is complete.
Have I understood this correctly ?

Answer 1

MagnusT76 wrote:
Hi. Just curios.
Lets say I have a class called MyClass. In that class I have an method called myMethod()
I then create an Object of that with.
MyClass mc = new MyClass();
mc.myMethod(); Is that better then to do
new MyClass().myMethod()
Neither one is inherently better. If you need to use the object other than for that one method call, you have no choice but to go with the first option. If that's all you need the object for, and the class name and method name and signature are short enough for it to be readable, you might prefer the second one.
What I think is the difference.
1 with the first example I create an Object that stays "alive"
2 in the second example the Object dies when myMethod() is complete.Java doesn't really have a concept of objects being "alive."
In the first case, you are retaining a reference to the object, and as long as you have that reference, it cannot be garbage collected.
In the second case you are not directly retaining a reference to the object, but that doesn't mean that one didn't escape from the method. So the object may or may not be GC-eligible.
public void myMethod() {
  someList.add(this);
}If myMethod() does something like that, then the object is not eligible for GC after your call, even though you didn't explicitly retain a reference, because the list now has a reference to it.