non-static

I'm just trying to see if I can fully understand the concept of static and the reason of static in a main class. The keyword static refers to the main class. the reason why methods in a main class are static is because the main class does not deal with objects but with the class itself. However constructors deal with objects and therefore uses non static constructors because objects have unique characteristics and it would not make sense to make them static. If anyone can see if I made a mistake in my statement or can steer me in the right direction, it would help me a great deal! :) I'm just

This question already has an answer here: problem sorting using member function as comparator 7 answers I have something like this: class Bar { public: pair<string,string> one; std::vector<string> cars; Bar(string one, string two, string car); }; class Car { public: string rz; Bar* owner; Car(string car, Bar* p); }; class Foo { public: Foo ( void ); ~Foo ( void ); int Count ( const string & one, const string & two) const; int comparator (const Bar & first, const Bar & second) const; std::vector<Bar> bars; }; int Foo::comparator(const Bar & first, const Bar & second) const{ return first.name <

The error comes from this line BoardState addme = new BoardState(); For some reason the non-static variable that it is pointing at is "new". I am unclear of how I can fix this error as new is not meant to be a variable, and is not. Looking through the stackoverflow records this error usually comes from a non-static method which is usually solved by making the method static or bypassing the method entirely. T This code below is to reference what is going on before and after this statement. public class IntelligentTicTacToe extends TicTacToe { public class BoardState{ public String TTTState;

In what cases is it necessary to synchronize access to instance members? I understand that access to static members of a class always needs to be synchronized- because they are shared across all object instances of the class. My question is when would I be incorrect if I do not synchronize instance members? for example if my class is public class MyClass { private int instanceVar = 0; public setInstanceVar() { instanceVar++; } public getInstanceVar() { return instanceVar; } } in what cases (of usage of the class MyClass ) would I need to have methods: public synchronized setInstanceVar() and

I know there are a lot of threads talking about this but so far I haven't found one that helps my situation directly. I have members of the class that I need to access from both static and non-static methods. But if the members are non-static, I can't seem to get to them from the static methods. public class SomeCoolClass { public string Summary = "I'm telling you"; public void DoSomeMethod() { string myInterval = Summary + " this is what happened!"; } public static void DoSomeOtherMethod() { string myInterval = Summary + " it didn't happen!"; } } public class MyMainClass { SomeCoolClass

Possible Duplicate: Why cant we have static method in an inner class? I know that the creation of a non-static inner-class object requires an outer-class object and the created non-static inner-class object automatically have a hidden reference to the object of the outer-class. But why can't a non-static inner-class have static members? The Java designer just have to disallow the access of non-static outer-class fields inside a static method of the inner-class, it would make more sense, non? If it does not make sense to have static members in an inner class, why inner class can inherit static