We Keep Coding

Is there a way to give boolean type as generic in Java?

I have a code block like below:
public Interface ISupClass{
void call();
void call1();
...
}
public class NormalClass implements ISupClass{
void call(){
....operations...
}
void call1(){
....operations...
}
...
}
public class DailyClass implements ISupClass{
void call(){
....operations...
}
void call1(){
....operations...
}
...
}
Then I call them from main service like that;
Instances:
private INormalClass dailyClass = new DailyClass();
private INormalClass normalClass = new NormalClass();
Method:
public void call(int type, boolean isDaily){
if(type == 0) {
if(isDaily){
dailyClass.call();
}
else{
normalClass.call();
}
}
if(type == 1) {
if(isDaily){
dailyClass.call1();
}
else{
normalClass.call1();
}
}
...
}
Is there a way to escape from isDaily check in above code block? Or how can I implement it effectively? I have just tried to implement with Java Generics but this doesn't look possible?
I know this looks like related with polimorfizm. But I wonder somethink like about it;
public Interface ISupClass<E>
call(E type)
...
public class NormalClass implements ISupClass<Boolen.FALSE>
...
public class DailyClass implements ISupClass<Boolen.TRUE>
...
public void call(int type, boolean isDaily){
supClass.call(isDaily);

(In case I understood what is the question)
This is the point of using interfaces. Simply do something like this:
public class Example {
public static interface ISupClass {
void doSomething();
}
public static class NormalClass implements ISupClass {
#Override
public void doSomething() {
System.out.println("I am a normal class.");
}
}
public static class DailyClass implements ISupClass {
#Override
public void doSomething() {
System.out.println("I am a daily class.");
}
}
public static void doSomething(ISupClass clazz) {
clazz.doSomething();
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
doSomething(new DailyClass());
doSomething(new NormalClass());
}
}
So, in your case instead of passing boolean isDaily, pass argument ISupClass in call method.
public void call(int type, ISupClass caller) {
caller.call();
}
Now, generics is a totally different story and I am not able to see how it is related to the question.

From what I understand, public void call(int type, boolean isDaily){...} is an orchestrator/mediator method that manipulates the one or the other instance according to the flags received in the parameters.
In this case, why not use a Map<Boolean, INormalClass> to store the two instances in a way where you can retrieve them from a boolean key :
Map<Boolean, INormalClass> map = new HashMap<>();
map.put(Boolean.TRUE, new DailyClass());
map.put(Boolean.FALSE, new NormalClass());
//...
public void call(int type, boolean isDaily){
INormalClass obj = map.get(isDaily);
if(type == 0) {
obj.call();
}
if(type == 1) {
obj.call1();
}
}

You could add default method to the interface:
public interface ISupClass {
default void call(int type) {
if (type == 0) {
call();
} else if(type == 1) {
call1();
}
}
void call();
void call1();
}
It leads you to following code:
public static void call(int type, boolean isDaily) {
if (isDaily) {
dailyClass.call(type);
} else {
normalClass.call(type);
}
}

Java - Method implementation dependent from parameter value

Consider a method
public void doSomething(String actionID){
switch (actionID){
case "dance":
System.out.print("I'm dancing");
break;
case "sleep":
System.out.print("I'm sleeping");
break;
default:
System.out.print("I've no idea what I'm doing");
}
The implementation of the method depends on the value of the parameter. Is there a more elegant way to do this, or a different design pattern to replicate the behaviour?

If the caller decides what logic is executed by passing different strings, then why not just have them call different methods:
public void doSomething(String actionID) {...}
...
doSomething("dance");
doSomething("sleep");
VS.:
public void dance() {...}
public void sleep() {...}
...
dance();
sleep();
It seems like you're unnecessarily funnelling all the calls into doSomething
But the strings might not always be literals. What if you're taking them from the console?
You could provide static mappings from the strings to the corresponding functions:
class MyClass {
private static final Map<String, Consumer<MyClass>> map = new HashMap<>();
static {
map.put("sleep", MyClass::sleep);
map.put("dance", MyClass::dance);
}
public void doSomething(String actionID) {
map.getOrDefault(actionID, MyClass::doNothing).accept(this);
}
public void dance() {
System.out.print("I'm dancing");
}
public void sleep() {
System.out.print("I'm sleeping");
}
private void doNothing() {
System.out.println("I've no idea what I'm doing");
}
}
This makes scenarios where you have a lot of switch cases a lot cleaner.

Introduce an interface, e.g.
public interface HumanState {
public void tellMeWhatYouAreDoing();
}
encapsulate the logic in different implementations
public class DancingState implements HumanState {
#Override
public void tellMeWhatYouAreDoing() {
System.out.println("I'm dancing");
}
}
public class SleepingState implements HumanState {
#Override
public void tellMeWhatYouAreDoing() {
System.out.println("I'm sleeping");
}
}
public class UnknownState implements HumanState {
#Override
public void tellMeWhatYouAreDoing() {
System.out.println("I've no idea what I'm doing");
}
}
and use a map. E.g.
public class HumanStateExample {
public static void main(String[] args) {
HumanStateExample humanStateExample = new HumanStateExample();
humanStateExample.doSomething("dance");
humanStateExample.doSomething("sleep");
humanStateExample.doSomething("unknown");
}
private final HashMap<String, HumanState> humanStateMap;
public HumanStateExample(){
humanStateMap = new HashMap<String, HumanState>();
humanStateMap.put("dance", new DancingState());
humanStateMap.put("sleep", new SleepingState());
}
public void doSomething(String action) {
HumanState humanState = humanStateMap.get(action);
if(humanState == null){
humanState = new UnknownState();
}
humanState.tellMeWhatYouAreDoing();
}
}

I'm not sure how the pattern is called, but it is very useful if you need to delegate the method call based on more than one parameter:
Create a lot of handlers where each one knows when it is responsible for handling a call. Then just loop through them and invoke the first one matching the parameter.
edit: I renamed the class from FancyParameterActionFactory to FancyParameterActionUtility: it is not a factory, the name was misleading
//Your method, but this time with a complex object, not with a simple string.
public void doSomething(FancyParameterObject fpo){
FancyParameterActionUtility.invokeOn(fpo);
}
//The utility which can handle the complex object and decides what to do.
public class FancyParameterActionUtility{
public Interface FPAHandler{
void invoke(FancyParameterObject fpo);
boolean handles(FancyParameterObject fpo);
}
//Omitted: Different implementations of FPAHandler
public static List<FPAHandler> handlers = new LinkedList<>();
static{
handlers.add(new DanceHandler());
handlers.add(new SleepHandler());
//Omitted: Different implementations of FPAHandler
}
public static void invokeOn(FancyParameterObject fpo){
for(FPAHandler handler:handlers){
if (handler.handles(fpo)){
handler.invoke(fpo);
return;
}
}
//Default-Behavior
}
}

Here is a simple implementation of the command pattern based your sample problem. I define a general AbstractCommand abstract class which contains two methods. The first method, createCommand(), instantiates a command class based on an input string name. This is how you can delegate your string input to create the right type of command. The second method is doAction(), and this is left undefined, to be implemented later on by specific concrete command classes.
public abstract class AbstractCommand {
public static AbstractCommand createCommand(String name) {
try {
String clsName = name + "Command";
Class<?> cls = Class.forName(clsName);
AbstractCommand command = (AbstractCommand) cls.newInstance();
return command;
}
catch (Exception e) {
System.out.println("Something went wrong.");
}
}
public abstract void doAction();
}
public class DanceCommand extends AbstractCommand {
public void doAction() {
System.out.println("I'm dancing");
}
}
public class TestCommandPattern {
public void doSomething(String actionID) {
AbstractCommand cmd = AbstractCommand.createCommand(actionID);
cmd.doAction();
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
TestCommandPattern test = new TestCommandPattern();
test.doSomething("Dance"); // should print "I'm dancing"
}
}
Now that this framework has been setup, you could easily add other commands for the various types of actions in your original problem. For example, you could create a SleepCommand class which would output I'm sleeping, or do whatever action you wish.

How is it possible to communicate between two classes in Java using an interface?

Hi ive been reading on some similar topics here but none of them answer my question. Some say you cant even do this which is not a good thing since I cant finnish my course in that case.
Heres som simple code. Think of each block as a separate class.
public interface Interface {
void printMessage(String meddelande);
}
public class Model implements Interface {
String message = "hej!";
public static void main(String[] args) {
Model model1 = new Model();
View view1 = new View();
model1.printMessage(model1.message); //Ska jag anropa funktionen såhär ens?
}
public void printMessage(String str) {
}
}
public class View implements Interface {
printMessage(String str) {
}
}
So, how is it now possible to tel the view to print this string from the model class without the classes knowing about each other? Its not allowed to send a reference of the model-objekt to the view-object. ; (

Define an Interface:
public interface MyInterface {
void printMessage(String str);
}
Define a class that can trigger the notification:
public class ClassNotifier {
MyInterface mInterface;
public ClassNotifier(MyInterface mInterface) {
this.mInterface = mInterface;
}
public void triggerTheMsg(String msg) {
if (mInterface != null) {
mInterface.printMessage(msg);
}
}
}
Define a class that will be informed:
public class InformedClass implements MyInterface {
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
InformedClass c = new InformedClass();
ClassNotifier cn = new ClassNotifier(c);
}
#Override
public void printMessage(String newMsg) {
System.out.println("A new msg is here: " + newMsg);
}
}
How does it works?:
this is named a callback parttern, the class ClassNotifier has a reference to the interface MyInterface, which is impl. by Informed class to, so every time the ClassNotifier calls the method printMessage, the method printMessage in the class Informed will be triggered too.

I advice you to use dependency injection, for example:
public class Model {
String message = "hej!";
Interface printer;
public void Model(Interface printer) {
printer = printer;
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Model model1 = new Model(new View());
model1.printMessage(model1.message);
}
public void printMessage(String str) {
printer.printMessage(str);
}
}

how to "pull down" a parameter when refactor in eclipse?

before refactor:
public interface Service {
public void hello(Person p);
}
public class BlackPersonServiceImpl implements Service {
#Override
public void hello(Person p) {
//...
}
}
public class WhitePersonServiceImpl implements Service {
#Override
public void hello(Person p) {
//...
}
}
public class BeforeRefactor {
public static void main(String[] args) {
String str = args[0];
Person p = JSON.parseObject(str, Person.class);
Service service = getServiceFromSpringContainer();
service.hello(p);
}
private static Service getServiceFromSpringContainer() {
//...
return null;
}
}
after refactor:
public interface Service {
public void hello(String str);
}
public class WhitePersonServiceImpl implements Service {
#Override
public void hello(String str) {
Person person = JSON.parseObject(str, Person.class);
//do something to person...
//...
}
}
public class AfterRefactor {
public static void main(String[] args) {
String str = args[0];
Service service = getServiceFromSpringContainer();
service.hello(str);
}
private static Service getServiceFromSpringContainer() {
//...
return null;
}
}
That's what I want(I think "pull down" is not the "right" word to describe it...).
I tried "introduce parameter object" in eclipse, and it does not work.
There are many implementations of "Service". I dont want to change them one by one.
Is there a good way to solve this problem?
Thanks!

You can do it somewhat for a single class and a single method (although it's akward and a succession of small refactoring steps), but not across several types at the same time.

Java - force implementation of a method for each child of an abstract class

I have an abstract class Action with children like SendMessageAction.
I would like to run these actions in a service but how could I force implementation of each child ?
For example I would like to implement an abstract method : void run(Action action)
and methods "run" for each possible Action with an error if some methods are missing.
Any idea ?

Something like below should help you to get started. Happy coding!
Action.java
public abstract class Action {
protected abstract void runAction();
}
MessageSenderAction.java
public class MessageSenderAction extends Action {
public void runAction() {
//send message
}
}
SomeOtherAction.java
public class SomeOtherAction extends Action {
public void runAction() {
//do something else
}
}
ActionHandler.java
public class ActionHandler {
private final static ActionHandler INSTANCE = new ActionHandler();
private ActionHandler() {}
public static ActionHandler getInstance() {
return INSTANCE;
}
private List<Action> allActions = new ArrayList<Action>();
public void addAction(Action action) {
allActions.add(action);
}
public void runAllActions() {
for(Action action: allActions) {
//just to handle exception if there is any. Not to hamper other actions in case of any failures
try {
action.runAction();
} catch(Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}
ActionDemo.java
public class ActionDemo {
public static void main(String... args) {
ActionHandler actionHandler = ActionHandler.getInstance();
Action msgSenderAction = new MessageSenderAction();
Action someOtherAction = new SomeOtherAction();
actionHandler.addAction(msgSenderAction);
actionHandler.addAction(someOtherAction);
actionHandler.runAllActions();
}
}