Stack newStack = new Stack();
newStack.push(0);
OR
Stack.push(0);
Note: Here Stack is a user defined class to implement concept of stack manually in java and not the predefined one.
Asked
Active
Viewed 36 times
-2
-
Does this answer your question? [Is using a lot of static methods a bad thing?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/752758/is-using-a-lot-of-static-methods-a-bad-thing) If not really, then search for more. – Ole V.V. May 12 '20 at 04:20
-
On the other hand, if the design of `Stack` is given and `push` *is* a static method, then `Stack.push(0)` is clearly preferred as clearest and concisest. – Ole V.V. May 12 '20 at 04:22
2 Answers
1
This allows having multiple stacks for different purposes.
Stack newStack = new Stack();
newStack.push(0);
We can have only one stack when using this.
Stack.push(0);
I prefer the first one as it allows initializing multiple stacks at the same time which the second way can't do.
Nandu Raj
- 2,072
- 9
- 20
0
In the first example, push is a non-static method of the Stack class. In order to use the push method, you have to create an instance of the Stack class.
Stack newStack = new Stack();
newStack.push(0);
The equivalent code with an anonymous instance would be:
new Stack().push(0);
which would be kind of useless in this case, since you're eventually going to want to pop the stack you created.
In the second example, push is a static method of the Stack class.
Stack.push(0);
Nandu Raj is correct in his answer in that you can only have one Stack in your application, rather than more than one with the non-static push method.
Creating and using non-static methods is generally a better programming practice, although there are cases, like the Java Math class, where static methods work better.
Gilbert Le Blanc
- 50,182
- 6
- 67
- 111