1.Can Some one illustrate how it works? Why it prints 1 instead of 2?
2.From the Oracle Official Java tutorial, the definition of this: Within an instance method or a constructor, this is a reference to the current object — the object whose method or constructor is being called. You can refer to any member of the current object from within an instance method or a constructor by using this.
// Base Class
class A {
public int m = 1;
public void view(){
// Print variable m
System.out.println(this.m);
//print the current class name
System.out.println(this.getClass());
}
}
// Subclass extends Base Class
public class B extends A{
// Define another variable m
public int m = 2;
public static void main(String[] args) {
B b = new B();
b.view();
}
}
Below is the debug of the view(){}:
My Question is:
You can see the current object is B, when we usethis, it represents the B, m = 1 in base class A, m = 2 in derived class B, then use the this.m, it should print 2, isn't it?
Variables are not polymorphic in Java; they do not override one another.
Related
class A {
public int a = 100;
}
class B extends A {
public int a = 80;
}
class C extends B {
public int a = 10;
public void show() {
int a = 0;
System.out.println(a);
System.out.println(super.a);
System.out.println(((A) this).a);
}
}
What does ((A) this).a in the line System.out.println(((A) this).a); do?
Is it upcasting/downcasting thisor is something else happening here?
I also tried System.out.println(this); and System.out.println((A)this); and they both have the same output. What exactly is happening here?
In the java programming language, we have classes. When we write java code, we create instances of those classes, for example:
Object o = new Object();
Object is a class. Writing new Object() creates an instance of that class. The above code declares a variable o and assigns it [a reference to] an instance of class Object.
In the terminology of the java programming language, we say that variable o has type Object.
In the code in your question, a variable that is assigned an instance of class C, really has three types.
It has type C.
It has type B since B is the superclass of C.
It has type A because it indirectly extends class A also.
In the context of the code in your question, this is a special variable whose type is C. Writing (A) this is telling java to relate to the variable this as if its type is A.
Class A cannot access its subclasses. Hence it is only aware of its class member a. Hence when you write this line of code...
((A) this).a
You are accessing the member of class A only.
System.out.println(a);a is the one from the show method of your C class → a = 0
System.out.println(super.a);a is the one from the super-class of C, which is B → a = 80
System.out.println(((A) this).a);First, you cast your C instance (this) into A, then you call a which is a member of the A class → a = 100
There is also something to consider : method will always take the more specialized one (except if super is used), where field will be taken directly from the type referenced (even if there is an extending class).
For example, if I add getA() in each classes :
class A {
public int a = 100;
public int getA(){
return a;
}
}
class B extends A {
public int a = 80;
public int getA(){
return a;
}
}
class C extends B {
public int a = 10;
public int getA(){
return a;
}
public void show() {
int a = 0;
System.out.println(a);
System.out.println(super.a);
System.out.println(((A) this).a);
System.out.println(getA());
System.out.println(super.getA());
System.out.println(((A) this).getA());
}
}
class Scratch {
public static void main(String[] args) {
new C().show();
}
}
I get the following output :
0
80
100
10
80
10
Which means that in the case of the method, except in the case of super.getA() which explicitly goes to the superclass, casting your C into a A doesn't change much for methods, as it impacts the field.
If you write something like obj.a, obj.getA() or someMethod(obj), Java somehow has to find the actual field or method to be used, based on the type or class of obj. There are two distinct dispatch mechanisms involved (plus the special construct super).
Dynamic dispatch (polymorphism, overriding): This is used when calling an instance method on the object, as in obj.getA(). Then the runtime class of the obj is examined, and if this class contains a getA() method, this is used. Otherwise, the direct parent class is examined for a getA() method, and so on up to the Object class.
Static dispatch: In cases like obj.a or someMethod(obj), the runtime class of obj doesn't matter. Involved is only the compiler, and from his knowledge of obj's type, he decides which field or method to use.
super dispatch: If you write super.getA() or super.a, your getA() method or a field is ignored, and instead the next-higher class in the hierarchy is used that contains such a method or field.
In your case you have 3 fields plus one local variable, all with the same name a. (By the way, it's a very bad idea to have such name conflicts in professional code.) We are inside a method show() declared in the C class. Let's have a look at some different expressions and what they mean here:
a references the local variable a. There's no dispatch needed, it's just that local definitions take precedence over fields.
this.a is a static-dispatch expression, so it's important what the compiler thinks about the type of this. And that's always the class where this code has been written. In your case, it's class C, so the field a from class C is used, the one being 10.
super.a is a super-dispatch expression, meaning that the a field from this class C is ignored and the next higher one taken (the one from B, in our case).
((A) this).a is static dispatch, but the (A) casting has a significant effect. The expression before the dot originally comes from this, being of type C, but the (A) cast tells the compiler to believe it were of type A. This is okay, as every C also is an A, by inheritance. But now, static dispatch sees something of type A in front of the dot, and dispatches to the a field from the A class, and no longer from C.
getA(), this.getA() and ((A) this).getA() are all dynamic-dispatch examples, all giving the same result. The method called will be the one based on the runtime class of this object. This will typically be one defined in the C class. But if show() was called on an object of a subclass of C, e.g. D, and D had its own getA() method, that one would be used.
super.getA() is a case of super-dispatch, it will call the getA() method next higher up in the class hierarchy from the current class, e.g. B.
System.out.println(this);
And
System.out.println((A)this)
These two prints the object reference to class C with toString() method.
System.out.println(((A)this).a);
This is upcasting, child object to parent object.
class A{
int a = 10;
}
class B extends A{
int a= 20;
}
public class C {
public static void main(String [] args){
A a = new B();
System.out.println(a.a);
}
}
output : 10
How it print value from base class based on above code.
B already inherits a from A. Doing int a = 20; again hides the a inherited from A. This means that an expression of the form x.a will only evaluate to 20 if the compile time of x is B.
To get your expected behaviour, you can reset a in the constructor of B:
class B {
// no need to redeclare "a" here!
public B() { a = 20; }
}
When you make a variable of the same name in a subclass like you have done here, its called hiding. The resulting subclass will now actually have both properties.
Please refer below image,
I have a Doubt
when we initialize our instance variables in Instance initialization block(s) in case of inheritance do they override the value of variable?
For example
class A{
int x;
}
class B extends A{
int x = 10;
}
public class C{
public static void main(String[] args){
A K = new B();
System.out.println(K.x);
}
}
o/p : 0
However when i use initialization blocks
class A{
int x;
{x = 15;}
}
class B extends A{
{x=20;}
}
public class C{
public static void main(String[] args){
A K = new B();
System.out.println(K.x);
}
}
OUTPUT 20
Why its so? why my initialization block(s) are affecting instance variables ? Moreover , i know that blocks are called when we make object but still the variable at output should correspond to variable type i.e A K (K should give value corresponding to class A)
You can override methods only, not variables. This code isn't "overriding" instance variables.
The first example has a different variables named x defined for A and B, making the variable an A means you see the variable defined for A (see the link provided by paulk23). In the second there is only one instance variable x which is visible to the subclass, the instance initializer assigns a value to an existing variable.
In the first example, you have two declarations of x, and in the second you only have one. In the second example, try changing B to:
class B extends A {
int x;
{ x=20; }
}
and you'll see the same behaviour as the first example: B defines a new variable that has an independent value from the one in A.
I have the following code:
import java.lang.*;
public class Program
{
public static void main(String [] args)
{
B a = new A();
a.p(10);
a.p(10.0);
}
}
class B {
public void p(double i)
{
System.out.println(i*2);
}
}
class A extends B{
public void p(int i)
{
System.out.println(i);
}
}
When I execute this code using B a = new A() , I get 20.0 in both cases which makes sense because overloading is handles during compile time where the compiler looks at the declared type and calls a function appropriately. Since our declared type was class B, class B's method was called in both cases. Now if I do A a = new A(); , I should be getting 10 in both answers but I am not. I am getting 10 for a.p(10) and 20.0 for a.p(10.0). Based on the concept of static binding and whole notion of overloading being done by static binding which looks at the declared type as opposed to the actual type, why is the result coming out this way ? I would very much appreciate your help.
An int can be widened to a double, but not the other way around. This means that 10 can call B.p(double) or A.p(int) but 10.0 is a double and will not be implicitly converted to an int i.e. only B.p(double) will be called.
Its because your method p is not an overridden method, it is just inhereted in your sub-class when you use
Super sup = new Sub();
sup.p(int);
sup.p(double);
In this case as your Super class has a method which takes double as a parameter and aa an int can fit into a double your Super-class's method is invoked the one which accepts double.
Sub sup = new Sub();
sup.p(int);
sup.p(double);
In this case however, as your subclass doesn't have a method which takes a double, for sup.p(double) call it uses the inherited method from super class if you pass double as an argument.
In your case, your are doing overloading which will get binded at compile time(static binding.).And static binding happens with type of reference rather than the type of object the reference is pointing.
In your first case you are using a reference variable of B and assigning an object of A to it.Since your reference is B, the method p(double) from B will get binded statically even if you use an int(since int can be widened to double).
In the second case you are using reference as A itself.In this case, you have two p() methods available.One is p(double) from B and other p(int) from A.So p(10) will call p(int) and p(10.0) will call p(double)
Try this:
class B {
public void p(String i)
{
System.out.println("parent:"+i);
}
}
class A extends B{
public void p(int i)
{
System.out.println(i);
}
}
public class Test1 {
public static void main(String args[]) {
A a = new A(); //arg
a.p(10);
a.p("sample");
}
}
If you change the line marked arg to B a = new A(), you will see compiler trying to call parent p in both the cases.
When you write A a = new A() you create a new object of type A, which will have 2 methods. A.p(int) and B.p(double), and when you call A.p(10.0), it will call B.p(double) due to lack of conversion.
This counter-example might help:
import java.lang.*;
public class X
{
public static void main(String [] args)
{
B c = new A();
c.p(10);
c.p(10.0);
c.p("AAA");
((A)c).p(10);
}
}
class B {
public void p(String s)
{
System.out.println("B: my string is " + s);
}
public void p(double i)
{
System.out.println("B: twice my double is: " + i*2);
}
}
class A extends B{
public void p(int i)
{
System.out.println("A: my number is " + i);
}
}
Output:
C:\temp>java X
B: twice my double is: 20.0
B: twice my double is: 20.0
B: my string is AAA
A: my number is 10
The issue is:
1) You're declaring the type as "B" (not "A")
2) B.p(10) can accept an int as a floating point argument
3) Consequently, that's what you're getting
It's really an issue of what argument types can be implicitly converted, than what methods are overloaded or overridden.
When the object has declared type B, the double version is invoked because it's compatible with an int argument, since in Java int is a subtype of double.
When the object is declared as a A, it has the method p() overloaded with two versions:
p(int arg);
p(double arg);
So, when you pass an int, the first version is picked because it's more accurate, and when you pass double the second one, because it's the most specific signature.
For reference, see the relevant JLS at §15.12.2 and this post by Gilad Bracha. BTW, don't try to figure out how the language should behave based on what you think is the most logical way, because every programming language is an engineering effort, and this means that there's a price you pay for whatever you take. The primary source of information for Java are the JLS, and if you read it carefully, you'll (surprisingly?) discover that there are even cases where the line in the source code is ambiguous and cannot be compiled.
To make the effect of widening of int to double more vivid I have created another example which is worth looking. Here, instead of double I have created a class called Parent and instead of int a Child class is created.
Thus,
double ~ Parent int~Child
Obviously child object can be widened to Parent reference.
package test;
public class OOPs {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Child ch = new Child(); // like int 10
Parent pa = new Parent();// like double 10.0
B a = new A(); // case 2 : A a = new A();
a.p(ch);// 10
a.p(pa);// 10.0
}
}
class B {
public void p(Parent i) {
System.out.println("print like 20");
System.out.println(i.getClass().getName());
}
}
class A extends B {
public void p(Child i) {
System.out.println("print like 10");
System.out.println(i.getClass().getName());
}
}
class Parent {
String name;
Parent() {
name = "Parent";
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
}
class Child extends Parent {
String name;
Child() {
name = "Child";
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
}
Case 1 - Output (B a = new A();)
print like 20
test.Child
print like 20
test.Parent
Case 2 - Output (A a = new A();)
print like 10
test.Child
print like 20
test.Parent
The question might be a very basic one. I am new to Java so please bear with me.
My code:
class A
{
int b=10;
A()
{
this.b=7;
}
int f()
{
return b;
}
}
class B extends A{ int b; }
class Test
{
public static void main(String[] args)
{
A a=new B();
System.out.println(a.f());
}
}
Why is the output 7? Doesn't class B get its own instance variable b?
It would but the function f can only see the version of b that is in A. Thus the function returns 7.
If you were to copy the function f into the class B you would see the member b of the class B being returned.
As Hiding instance variables of a class explains, Java variables are not polymorphic. The 2 b variables are 2 different variables as you would expect, but when you call the function A.f it can only see the one b variable that A has. So it returns A.b and NOT B.b.
So to answer your question, class B DOES get its own instance variable b, and it is completely independant of A.b but you currently have no way to access it so you cannot see its value.
Your type reference is A:
A a = new B();
Thus instance fields/static fields and static methods will be provided from A, as long as concerned method (in your case f()) isn't overriden by B.
In other languages, as Scala, variables can be redefined in subclasses and targeted even from a supertype reference.