Grants original solution feels correct and analogous to Java anonymous classes.

public void aMethod ()
{

}

public void startThread ()
{
new Thread(new Runnable ()
{
public void run ()
{
aMethod();
}
}).start();
}

Here in this example aMethod is scoped to the parent class, the same class the Thread was created. Runnable is an interface instanciated as an anonymous class. I cant be certain but I seem to remember the compiler has a hand in making the run method have access to the parent class.

Ive used many similar solutions in AS2, eg.

interface IRequest
{
public function handleRequest (aRequest:Request)
}

class Foo
{

public function initHandlers ()
{
var _this:Foo = this;

// Create new instance of Irequest interface
var aHander:IRequest = new IRequest ();
// Define handleRequest method
aHandler.handleRequest = function ()
{
_this.doSomething();
}
this.setRequestHandler(?XXX.YYY?, aHandler);
}
}

Ive left some methods undefined however this seems to recreate the functionality of anonymous inner classes, using the activation object ?trick?. Of course we could do all this without the interface ? however the interface is essential really. Its our contract, but also provides comment like reminders of what the code is doing.

So, I guess, my point is that grants method is my best practice, or atleast in some situations, thoughts anyone?

Matt

It amazes me that features like these aren’t built in by MM, and always end up being added by diligent users after the fact.