I am working on a homework assignment that takes input from a .csv file and will prompt the user for different questions pertaining to the information contained within (crime statistics).
My code is as follows and it's still really early so I just have some placeholder variables in there as I have been wracking my head trying to figure out the best approach to this problem.
import java.io.*;
public class USCrimeArray {
String crimeArray[][] = new String[21][20];
public void createCrimeArray() throws Exception{
String crimeArrayInputString;
int crimeArrayRowValue = -1;
try (BufferedReader crimeArrayInput = new BufferedReader(new FileReader("C:/Users/Joey/Documents/Crime.csv"))) {
while ((crimeArrayInputString = crimeArrayInput.readLine()) != null) {
crimeArrayRowValue++;
crimeArray[crimeArrayRowValue] = crimeArrayInputString.split(",");
}
} catch (IOException io) {
io.getMessage();
}
}
public USCrimeArray(){
String[][] thisArray = crimeArray.clone();
}
public String[][] getCrimeArray(){
return crimeArray.clone();
}
}
This is the code for my first class and if I do a deepToString inside of createCrimeArray I get the information back that I want. The constructor for USCrimeArray hasn't really been thought out yet my main question is how to write the information to the crimeArray[][] so that I can carry it back over to other classes.
Once again this test main hasn't been thought out too far because I am still struggling with why my method is not writing over the crimeArray[][] with the while loop and it is as follows:
import java.util.Arrays;
public class USCrimeClass {
public static void main(String[] args) {
USCrimeArray crimeArray = new USCrimeArray();
String[][] test = crimeArray.getCrimeArray();
System.out.println(Arrays.deepToString(test));
}
}
I know there's a lot I'm doing wrong here, but this is the end result so far after having altered everything over and over again and not making any progress. The result of the system out in this is obviously just a 21x20 array of null elements. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
You need to call createCrimeArray() in USCrimeClass
public class USCrimeClass {
public static void main(String[] args) {
USCrimeArray crimeArray = new USCrimeArray();
crimeArray.createCrimeArray();
String[][] test = crimeArray.getCrimeArray();
System.out.println(Arrays.deepToString(test));
}
}
Also,
in the constructor of USCrimeArray you are clonning the array into a local variable thisArray but never use it. this is redundant and can be safely removed.
in getCrimeArray() you are returning a clone of the array. this is not needed (unless you want to keep USCrimeArray immutable). you can just return the array itself
Instance variables
instance variables are non static class level variables (much like crimeArray).
One can consider instance variables as serving two purposes:
"details" of the problem domain of the class. For example Person class will have instance variables such as firstName and lastName that are details of one person.
"configuration" variables holding information related to the technological environment and not pertaining to the problem domain of the class. For example, one sometimes might find a class with a boolean deleted instance variable that signifies a "soft deleted" instance that is not to be presented to the user or included in calculations. the purpose behind this is to support undo of deletion.
so crimeArray is of category details of USCrimeArray. common best practice is to initialise instance variables in the class constructor, so by the time you finish creating a new instance, you have one that has full and valid details. So I would move all of the code of createCrimeArray() into the constructor.
If you need to modify an instance variable after it was initialised, then a "setter" method can be used. these have a standardized signature: public void setCrimeArray(crimeArray[][]). having a standardized signature allows your class to be used by frameworks and libraries that add functionality. For example, storing the data in a relational database, sending/recieving the data over the internet, etc.
Now, I see that the external input that is used to populate the array comes from a file. The way it is coded now, USCrimeArray can only read one specific file from predetermined file syatem location. a more flexible way would be for the class to receive the specification for external input as an argument:
public USCrimeArray(String filename) {
...
try (BufferedReader crimeArrayInput = new BufferedReader(new FileReader(filename))) {
...
}
now the same class can be used to process an array from different files.
now you can even make the file name an argument of the java program:
public class USCrimeClass {
public static void main(String[] args) {
USCrimeArray crimeArray = new USCrimeArray(arg[0]);
System.out.println(Arrays.deepToString(test));
}
}
now the same java program can process different files without need for recompile.
Related
I'm trying to automate the testing process for customly written programs designed to solve competitive programming challenges. Below is a dummy sample implementation of Solution:
public class Solution {
private static String dummyField = "initial";
public static int initialize(InputStream in) {
//competitive programmer custom code
System.out.println(dummyField);
dummyField = "changed";
return subCaseCount;
}
public void processSingleSubCase(InputStream in) {
//competitive programmer custom code
}
}
Prewritten test code for solution regardless of its implementation:
public void testSolution() throws FileNotFoundException {
for(File testResource : testResources) {
InputStream in = new FileInputStream(testResource);
int subCaseCount = Foo.initialize(in);
for (int subCase = 0; subCase < subCaseCount; subCase++) {
new Foo().processSingleSubCase(in);
}
//magic call to re-init all static fields without knowing their number/names in advance goes here
}
//console current output:
//initial
//changed
//changed
//...
//desired:
//initial
//initial
//initial
//....
}
The static fields can be mutable, so caching the initial values and mapping them to field names using reflection as a first setup, then reassigning them in between iterations won't do.
I did manage to come up with a working solution which basically reloads the class using a different class loader in between iterations, it did work but was slow: it took about 50 seconds just to reload classes 300 times (test resources are auto generated and I'd like to have the flexibility to auto generate as many as tolerable).
Is there a faster alternative?
My two thoughts for how to do this are:
Use instances rather than statics, since that way the new instance for each test is fresh.
If you need (or want) to stick with statics: Prior to the first test, cache the static values, then reassign them from the cache between tests. If the static values are object references referring to mutable objects, you'll need to make deep copies.
class CSVReader {
private List<String> output;
private InputStream input;
public CSVReader(InputStream input) {
this.input = input;
}
public void read() throws Exception{
//do something with the inputstream
// create output list.
}
public List<String> getOutput() {
return Collections.unmodifiableList(output);
}
I am trying to create a simple class which will be part of a library. I would like to create code that satisfies the following conditions:
handles all potential errors or wraps them into library errors and
throws them.
creates meaningful and complete object states (no incomplete object structures).
easy to utilize by developers using the library
Now, when I evaluated the code above, against the goals, I realized that I failed badly. A developer using this code would have to write something like this -
CSVReader reader = new CVSReader(new FileInputStream("test.csv");
reader.read();
read.getOutput();
I see the following issues straight away -
- developer has to call read first before getOutput. There is no way for him to know this intuitively and this is probably bad design.
So, I decided to fix the code and write something like this
public List<String> getOutput() throws IOException{
if(output==null)
read();
return Collections.unmodifiableList(output);
}
OR this
public List<String> getOutput() {
if(output==null)
throw new IncompleteStateException("invoke read before getoutput()");
return Collections.unmodifiableList(output);
}
OR this
public CSVReader(InputStream input) {
read(); //throw runtime exception
}
OR this
public List<String> read() throws IOException {
//read and create output list.
// return list
}
What is a good way to achieve my goals? Should the object state be always well defined? - there is never a state where "output" is not defined, so I should create the output as part of constructor? Or should the class ensure that a created instance is always valid, by calling "read" whenever it finds that "output" is not defined and just throw a runtime exception? What is a good approach/ best practice here?
I would make read() private and have getOutput() call it as an implementation detail. If the point of exposing read() is to lazy-load the file, you can do that with exposing getOutput only
public List<String> getOutput() {
if (output == null) {
try {
output = read();
} catch (IOException) {
//here you either wrap into your own exception and then declare it in the signature of getOutput, or just not catch it and make getOutput `throws IOException`
}
}
return Collections.unmodifiableList(output);
}
The advantage of this is that the interface of your class is very trivial: you give me an input (via constructor) I give you an output (via getOutput), no magic order of calls while preserving lazy-loading which is nice if the file is big.
Another advantage of removing read from the public API is that you can go from lazy-loading to eager-loading and viceversa without affecting your clients. If you expose read you have to account for it being called in all possible states of your object (before it's loaded, while it's already running, after it already loaded). In short, always expose the least possible
So to address your specific questions:
Yes, the object state should always be well-defined. Your point of not knowing that an external call on read by the client class is needed is indeed a design smell
Yes, you could call read in the constructor and eagerly load everything upfront. Deciding to lazy-load or not is an implementation detail dependent on your context, it should not matter to a client of your class
Throwing an exception if read has not been called puts again the burden to calling things in the right, implicit order on the client, which is unnecessary due to your comment that output is never really undefined so the implementation itself can make the risk-free decision of when to call read
I would suggest you make your class as small as possible, dropping the getOutput() method all together.
The idea is to have a class that reads a CSV file and returns a list, representing the result. To achieve this, you can expose a single read() method, that will return a List<String>.
Something like:
public class CSVReader {
private final InputStream input;
public CSVReader(String filename) {
this.input = new FileInputStream(filename);
}
public List<String> read() {
// perform the actual reading here
}
}
You have a well defined class, a small interface to maintain and the instances of CSVReader are immutable.
Have getOutput check if it is null (or out of date) and load it in automatically if it is. This allows for a user of your class to not have to care about internal state of the class's file management.
However, you may also want to expose a read function so that the user can chose to load in the file when it is convenient. If you make the class for a concurrent environment, I would recommend doing so.
The first approach takes away some flexibility from the API: before the change the user could call read() in a context where an exception is expected, and then call getOutput() exception-free as many times as he pleases. Your change forces the user to catch a checked exception in contexts where it wasn't necessary before.
The second approach is how it should have been done in the first place: since calling read() is a prerequisite of calling getOutput(), it is a responsibility of your class to "catch" your users when they "forget" to make a call to read().
The third approach hides IOException, which may be a legitimate exception to catch. There is no way to let the user know if the exception is going to be thrown or not, which is a bad practice when designing runtime exceptions.
The root cause of your problem is that the class has two orthogonal responsibilities:
Reading a CSV, and
Storing the result of a read for later use.
If you separate these two responsibilities from each other, you would end up with a cleaner design, in which the users would have no confusion over what they must call, and in what order:
interface CSVData {
List<String> getOutput();
}
class CSVReader {
public static CSVData read(InputStream input) throws IOException {
...
}
}
You could combine the two into a single class with a factory method:
class CSVData {
private CSVData() { // No user instantiation
}
// Getting data is exception-free
public List<String> getOutput() {
...
}
// Creating instances requires a factory call
public static CSVData read(InputStream input) throws IOException {
...
}
}
I'm learning about Sets and Maps in the Introduction to Java Programming book by Daniel Liang. My professor has assigned a problem in the back of the chapter that asks me to create a program that:
Queries the user for input on name
Queries the user for gender
Using these two criteria, and this/these website(s): http://cs.armstrong.edu/liang/data/babynamesranking2001.txt
... http://cs.armstrong.edu/liang/data/babynamesranking2010.txt
I have to be able to get the ranking.
I'm supposed to get this information into an array of 10 maps.
Each map corresponds with a .txt file/year. This is where I'm having problems with. How do I do this?
The (Int) rank of the student is the value of the map, and the key is the name (String) of the baby.
The way I was thinking was to create an array of maps or maybe a list of them. So like:
List<Map<Int, String>> or <Map<Int, String>[] myArray;
Yet even after that the issue of how I get all of this information from the .txt file to my maps is a hard one for me.
This is what I've come up so far. I can't say I'm happy with it. It doesn't even work when I try to start reading information is because I haven't specified the size of my array.
public class BabyNamesAndPopularity
{
public static void main (String[] args) throws IOException
{
Map<Integer, String>[] arrayOfMaps;
String myURL = "cs.armstrong.edu/liang/data/babynamesranking2001.txt";
java.net.URL url = new java.net.URL(myURL);
Scanner urlInput = new Scanner (url.openStream());
while(urlInput.hasNext())
{
...
}
}
}
Would it be viable to make a set OF MAPS? I was kind of thinking it would be better to make a set OF maps because of the fact that sets expand as needed (according to the load factor). I just need some general guidance. Unfortunately the CS program at my university (Francis Marion University in Florence, SC) is VERY small and we don't have any tutors for this stuff.
This answer rather vague, because of broad nature of question, and it may be more suitable for
programmers SE site. Still, you may find these two points worth something.
Instead of thinking in terms of 'raw' compound collections, such as lists of maps of sets or such, try to invent set of domain types, which would reflect your problem domain, and, as the next step, implement these types using suitable Java collections or arrays.
Unit-testing and incremental refinement. Instead of immediately starting with access to remote data (via java.net.URL), start with static source of data. Idea here is to have 'reliable' and easily accessible input data hand, which would allow you to write unit tests easily and w/o access to network or even to file system, using set of domain types from 1st point, above. As you write unit tests you can invent necessary domain types/methods names in unit tests at first, then implement these types/methods, then make unit tests pass.
For example, you may start by writing following unit test (I assume you know how to organize your Java project in your IDE, so unit test(s) can be run properly):
public class SingleFileProcessingTest {
private static String[] fileRawData;
#BeforeClass
public static void fillRawData() {
fileRawData = new String[2];
// values are from my head, resembling format from links you've posted
fileRawData[0] = "Jacob\t20000\tEmily\t19999";
fileRawData[1] = "Michael\t18000\tMadison\t17000";
}
#Test
public void test() {
Rankings rankings = new Rankings();
rankings.process(fileRawData);
assertEquals("Jacob", rankings.getTop().getName());
assertEquals("Madison", rankings.getScorerOfPosition(4).getName());
assertEquals(18000, rankings.getScoreOf("Michael"));
assertEquals(4, rankings.getSize());
}
}
Of course, this won't even compile -- you need to type in code of Rankings class, code of class returned by getTop() or getScorerOfPosition(int) and so on. After you made this compile, you'll need to make test pass. But you get main idea here -- domain types and incremental refinement. And easily verifiable code w/o dependencies on file system or network. Just plain old java objects (POJOs). Code for working with external data sources can be added later on, after you get your POJOs right and make tests, which cover most parts of your use cases, pass.
UPDATE Actually, I've mixed up levels of abstraction in code above: proper Rankings class should not process raw data, this is better to be done in separate class, say, RankingsDataParser. With that, unit test, renamed to RankingsProcessingTest, will be:
public class RankingsProcessingTest {
#Test
public void test() {
Rankings rankings = new Rankings();
rankings.addScorer(new Scorer("Jacob", 20000));
rankings.addScorer(new Scorer("Emily", 19999));
rankings.addScorer(new Scorer("Michael", 18000));
rankings.addScorer(new Scorer("Madison", 17000));
assertEquals("Jacob", rankings.getTop().getName());
// assertEquals("Madison", rankings.getScorerOfPosition(4).getName());
// implementation of getScorerOfPosition(int) left as exercise :)
assertEquals(18000, rankings.getScoreOf("Michael"));
assertEquals(4, rankings.getSize());
}
}
With following initial implementation of Rankings and Scorer, this is actually compiles and passes:
class Scorer {
private final String name;
private final int rank;
Scorer(String name, int rank) {
this.name = name;
this.rank = rank;
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public int getRank() {
return rank;
}
}
class Rankings {
private final HashMap<String, Scorer> scorerByName = new HashMap<>();
private Scorer topScorer;
public Scorer getTop() {
return topScorer;
}
public void addScorer(Scorer scorer) {
if (scorerByName.get(scorer.getName()) != null)
throw new IllegalArgumentException("This version does not support duplicate names of scorers!");
if (topScorer == null || scorer.getRank() > topScorer.getRank()) {
topScorer = scorer;
}
scorerByName.put(scorer.getName(), scorer);
}
public int getSize() {
return scorerByName.size();
}
public int getScoreOf(String scorerName) {
return scorerByName.get(scorerName).getRank();
}
}
And unit test for parsing of raw data will start with following (how to download raw data should be responsibility of yet another class, to be developed and tested separately):
public class SingleFileProcessingTest {
private static String[] fileRawData;
#BeforeClass
public static void fillRawData() {
fileRawData = new String[2];
// values are from my head
fileRawData[0] = "Jacob\t20000\tEmily\t19999";
fileRawData[1] = "Michael\t18000\tMadison\t17000";
}
#Test
public void test() {
// uncomment, make compile, make pass
/*
RankingsDataParser parser = new RankingsDataParser();
parser.parse(fileRawData);
Rankings rankings = parser.getParsedRankings();
assertNotNull(rankings);
*/
}
}
I'm working on localization for a program I've written with a couple other guys. Most of the strings now load in the appropriate language from an ini file. I'm trying to do the same with the format of currency in the program. However, I'm getting a runtime exception as soon as I attempt to launch the application.
I'm using the Locale object as a parameter to a few NumberFormat.getCurrencyInstance()'s, like so:
private static final NumberFormat decf;
static
{
decf = NumberFormat.getCurrencyInstance(Lang.cLocale);
decf.setRoundingMode(RoundingMode.HALF_UP);
}
Lang is the class which contains all the localization stuff. The code the IDE complains about at attempted runtime is public static Locale cLocale = new Locale(GUI.DB_info[19],GUI.DB_info[20]);
GUI is the class the GUI is contained in, and where we decided to construct the DB_info array (which itself just contains information loaded from a remote database in another class). DB_info[19] is the language code (es right now) and DB_info[20] is the country code (US). The array elements are being properly filled-- or were, I can't get far enough into the program to tell right now; but nothing has changed with the code for filling DB_info.
The full exception is as follows:
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError
at greetingCard.GUI.<clinit>(GUI.java:118)
Caused by: java.lang.NullPointerException
at java.util.Locale.<init>(Unknown Source)
at java.util.Locale.<init>(Unknown Source)
at greetingCard.Lang.<clinit>(Lang.java:13)
... 1 more
The line in GUI referenced is: static String welcome = Lang.L_WELCOME + ", " + empName;, and Lang.java basically looks like this:
// Set locale for currency display
public static Locale cLocale = new Locale(GUI.DB_info[19],GUI.DB_info[20]); // language, country
// Employee specific strings
public static String L_AMT_REMAIN = "";
public static String L_AMT_TEND = "";
public static String L_APPROVED = "";
public static String L_ARE_YOU_SURE = "";
[...]
public static void Main(String emp_lang)
{
String header = "";
if (emp_lang.equals("ENG"))
{
header = "ENG";
}
else if (emp_lang.equals("SPA"))
{
header = "SPA";
}
else if (emp_lang.equals("FRE"))
{
header = "FRE";
}
else if (emp_lang.equals("GER"))
{
header = "GER";
}
else
{
header = "ENG";
}
try
{
Ini ini = new Ini(new File("C:/lang.ini"));
L_AMT_REMAIN = ini.get(header, "L_AMT_REMAIN");
L_AMT_TEND = ini.get(header, "L_AMT_TEND");
L_APPROVED = ini.get(header, "L_APPROVED");
L_ARE_YOU_SURE = ini.get(header, "L_ARE_YOU_SURE");
[...]
L_WELCOME = ini.get(header, "L_WELCOME");
L_WELCOME2 = ini.get(header, "L_WELCOME2");
L_XACT_CHNG = ini.get(header, "L_XACT_CHNG");
L_YES = ini.get(header, "L_YES");
System.err.println("Employee Language: " + header);
}
catch (InvalidFileFormatException e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
}
catch (IOException e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
}
} // end public static void main
That's for the majority of the strings to be displayed in different languages. There is another method inside Lang that loads some other strings, independent of the first set. I don't believe it factors into this problem but I can post it if needed.
The order in which these classes/methods get launched is as follows:
GUI.Main calls the Login class, which calls a CreateLogin method. That method calls Clients.main, which gets the DB_info array from GUI passed to it. Clients fills the DB_info array. Lang.other is then called (to get language-specific strings for the login page), and the Login buttons and labels are created. Once a login is successful, the perferred language of the employee logging in (from a DB) is passed to Lang.main to load the other strings (hence the emp_lang being passed in the code above).
Up until I added the code for the Locale object, all of this worked fine. Now I get the ExceptionInInitializerError exception. Anyone know what's going on?
BTW, for loading from the ini file I'm using ini4j. Some forum posts I found while googling suggest this is a problem with that, but I don't see how it relates to the problem with Locale objects. The ini stuff works (worked) fine.
Sounds like you have a cycle in your static initializers, so something is not initialized yet.
GUI calls Lang's static initializer before getting Lang.L_WELCOME. Lang calls GUIs static initializer in line 2. Your exception trace makes it look like GUI calls Langs static initializer for some reason.
In all, cycles like this mean that someone is going to reference a statically initialized object and get null instead of what they expected to get. In this case, I suspect Lang.java, line 2, is passing two null pointers to the Locale constructor.
As Keith notes, you have a static initializer cycle. To help future readers...
To minimize these bugs, initialize (simple) constants (with no or minimal constructors) before (complex) variables, so here String before Locale – less room for cycles to cause problems.
Debugging-wise, NullPointerException on a static field and 2 <clinit> in stack trace, with the earlier class appearing in the failing line, are the clues that this is an uninitialized field caused by a static initializer cycle.
Okay I'll try to be direct.
I am working on a file sharing application that is based on a common Client/Serer architecture. I also have HandleClient class but that is not particularly important here.
What I wanna do is to allow users to search for a particular file that can be stored in shared folders of other users. For example, 3 users are connected with server and they all have their respective shared folders. One of them wants to do a search for a file named "Madonna" and the application should list all files containing that name and next to that file name there should be an information about user(s) that have/has a wanted file. That information can be either username or IPAddress. Here is the User class, the way it needs to be written (that's how my superiors wanted it):
import java.io.File;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Scanner;
public class User {
public static String username;
public static String ipAddress;
public User(String username, String ipAddress) {
username = username.toLowerCase();
System.out.println(username + " " + ipAddress);
}
public static void fileList() {
Scanner userTyping = new Scanner(System.in);
String fileLocation = userTyping.nextLine();
File folder = new File(fileLocation);
File[] files = folder.listFiles();
ArrayList<String> list = new ArrayList<String>();
for (int i = 0; i < files.length; i++) {
list.add(i, files[i].toString().substring(fileLocation.length()));
System.out.println(list.get(i));
}
}
public static void main(String args[]) {
System.out.println("Insert the URL of your shared folder");
User.fileList();
}
}
This class stores attributes of a particular user (username, IPAddress) and also creates the list of files from the shared folder of that particular user. the list type is ArrayList, that's how it has to be, again, my superiors told me to.
On the other hand I need another class that is called RequestForFile(String fileName) whose purpose is to look for a certain file within ArrayLists of files from all users that are logged in at the moment of search.
This is how it should look, and this is where I especially need your help cause I get an error and I can't complete the class.
import java.util.ArrayList;
public class RequestForFile {
public RequestForFile(String fileName) {
User user = new User("Slavisha", "84.82.0.1");
ArrayList<User> listOfUsers = new ArrayList();
listOfUsers.add(user);
for (User someUser : listOfUsers) {
for (String request : User.fileList()) {
if (request.equals(fileName))
System.out.println(someUser + "has that file");
}
}
}
}
The idea is for user to look among the lists of other users and return the user(s) with a location of a wanted file.
GUI aside for now, I will get to it when I fix this problem.
Any help appreciated.
Thanks
I'm here to answer anything regarding this matter.
There are lots of problems here such as:
I don't think that this code can compile:
for (String request : User.fileList())
Because fileList() does not return anything. Then there's the question of why fileList() is static. That means that all User objects are sharing the same list. I guess that you have this becuase you are trying to test your user object from main().
I think instead you should have coded:
myUser = new User(...);
myUser.fileList()
and so fileList could not be static.
You have now explained your overall problem more clearly, but that reveals some deeper problems.
Let's start at the very top. Your request object: I think it represents one request for one user with one file definition. But it needs to go looking in the folders of many users. You add the the requesting user to a list, but what about the others. I think that this means that you need another class responsible for holding all the users.
Anyway lets have a class called UserManager.
UserMananger{
ArrayList<User> allTheUsers;
public UserManager() {
}
// methods here for adding and removing users from the list
// plus a method for doing the search
public ArrayList<FileDefinitions> findFile(request) [
// build the result
}
}
in the "line 14: for (String request : User.fileList()) {" I get this error: "void type not allowed here" and also "foreach not applicable to expression type"
You need to let User.fileList() return a List<String> and not void.
Thus, replace
public static void fileList() {
// ...
}
by
public static List<String> fileList() {
// ...
return list;
}
To learn more about basic Java programming, I can strongly recommend the Sun tutorials available in Trials Covering the Basics chapter here.
It looks like you're getting that error because the fileList() method needs to returns something that can be iterated through - which does not include void, which is what that method returns. As written, fileList is returning information to the console, which is great for your own debugging purposes, but it means that other methods can't get any of the information fileList sends to the console.
On a broader note, why is RequestForFile a separate class? If it just contains one method, you can just write it as a static method, or as a method in the class that's going to call it. Also, how will it get lists of other users? It looks like there's no way to do so as is, as you've hard-coded one user.
And looking at the answers, I'd strongly second djna's suggestion of having some class that acts as the controller/observer of all the Users.