Any javafags here? I'm trying to create an anonymous class

You can't do what you're asking. You're going to have to make a wrapper object.

>>60993037
I figured out my problem, I just copied the method from the superclass and when the object was created by "new" I overrode it then

What do you mean by that though? You can make wrapper classes yourself? I thought it was only for java's primitive data types

File: noreallystop.png (733KB, 666x523px) Image search: [Google]

733KB, 666x523px

>>60992220
Stop using Java

>>60993143

You're confusing wrappers with boxing.

File: 1497209450420.jpg (78KB, 492x559px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 492x559px

>>60993179
>mfw i always thought they were the same
Please enlighten me

>>60993233

Boxing is a special case of wrapping. Boxing is when it applies to Java's primitives, and it's supported directly within the language.

int a = 1;
Integer b = new Integer(a);
Integer c = a; // it just werks 

What I was suggesting you do is something like this.

public class MyWrapper implements InputStream
{
    InputStream wrappedObject;
    MyWrapper(InputStream wrappedObject)
    {
        this.wrappedObject = wrappedObject;
    }
    public methodToOverride()
    {
        // Do some shit
    }
    public otherMethod1()
    {
        wrappedObject.otherMethod1();
    }
    public otherMethod2()
    {
        wrappedObject.otherMethod2();
    }
    ...
}

It's ugly but I don't know how else you can extend the functionality of that object without having access to its point of construction.

>>60993442
I see, thanks man. This makes perfect sense