We Keep Coding

One class implements from two different interfaces in Java

I have two classes that implements from two interfaces.
Here is my interfaces:
interface Identifiable {
int getId();
}
interface Greetable {
String helloMessage();
String byeMessage();
}
Here is my classes:
public class Lecturer implements Greetable, Identifiable {
private int employeeId;
private String name;
private String title;
#Override
public String helloMessage() {
return name;
}
#Override
public String byeMessage() {
return title;
}
}
public class Student implements Greetable, Identifiable {
private char examScore;
#Override
public String helloMessage() {
return "Hi";
}
#Override
public String byeMessage() {
return "Whats up";
}
}
I get the error from the classes that it has to abstract the methods from the interfaces? What does that mean?

Non-abstract classes are required to create concrete versions of any methods found in any interfaces that they're implementing, and while your classes implement concrete versions of one of the interface, the Greetable interface, you're not implementing all the methods of both interfaces, here the public int getId() method from the Identifiable interface is missing from both classes.
Solution: give both classes an int id field as well as the getId() method that returns the value held by this field.
e.g. for Student,
public class Student implements Greetable, Identifiable {
private char examScore;
private int id; // **** your classes will need this field ****
// need to set the ID somehow, either with a setter or a constructor
public Student(int id) {
this.id = id;
}
#Override
public String helloMessage() {
return "Hi";
}
#Override
public String byeMessage() {
return "Whats up";
}
#Override // **************** add this method to return the value held by id ******
public int getId() {
return this.id;
}
}

You define to implement both interfaces, but you only implemented the methods of the second interface.
So you have to implement the method getId() in both classes.

You havent implemeted the getId() method in Identifiable. If you are not implementing that method you need to make the Lecturer and Student as abstract or you need to implement the getId() method in both the classes.
In your case I think you will need to create instances of the Student and Lecturer. If so then you cannot make them as abstract, as abstract class instances cannot be created. So better implement the getId() in both the classes.

Your Student and Lecturer classes MUST implement both Greetable, Identifiable interface methods, otherwise they need to be declared as abstract classes i.e., you are missing getId() from Identifiable interface, which is causing the issues, corrected code below.
Lecturer class:
public class Lecturer implements Greetable, Identifiable {
int getId() {
return employeeId;
}
//all other existing methods
}
Student class:
public class Student implements Greetable, Identifiable {
int getId() {
return studentId;
}
//all other existing methods
}
You can look here

Mapping abstract class in dozer

I have the following class structure (it actually is a VO layer with Hibernate mappings):
public abstract class abstractClassVO {
private int id;
private String name;
}
public class concreteClassAVO extends abstractClassVO {
private String aAttribute;
}
public class concreteClassBVO extends abstractClassVO {
private Long bAttribute;
}
And the equivalent DTO objects:
public abstract class abstractClassDTO {
private int id;
private String name;
}
public class concreteClassADTO extends abstractClassDTO {
private String aAttribute;
}
public class concreteClassBDTO extends abstractClassDTO {
private Long bAttribute;
}
Then I have another object like this:
public class compositeObject {
private int anAttribute;
private abstractClassVO myInstance;
}
and its equivalent:
public class compositeObjectDTO{
private int anAttribute;
private abstractClassDTO myInstance;
}
How can I tell dozer to automatically map myInstance to the specific DTO that corresponds to the concrete class implementation in the VO layer?
Currently, out of the box, Dozer isn't even putting anything in the myInstance field of the compositeObjectDTO class. My guess is that it's due to the fact that abstractClassDTO it is an abstact class, and since it cannot determine the implementation, it does nothing. I am not getting any exceptions.

Dozer can't do it out of the box but you could write a helper that would determine destination class by source class. You can get this information from DozerBeanMapper.getMappingMetadata().getClassMappings* methods. These methods return list of ClassMappingMetadata that contains destination class. You just only need to chech whether destination class is inherited from abstractClassDTO. This check can be omitted if you only have one mapping for one VO.
For bi-directional mapping you should additionally check ClassMappingMetadata.MappingDirection field.

Programming difference between POJO and Bean

I have the following two classes. Can I say the first one is a POJO class and the second one as a Bean class?
1) POJO class, since it has only getter and setter method, and all the member are declared as private
public class POJO {
private int id;
private String name;
public int getId() {
return id;
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public void setId() {
this.id = id;
}
public void setName() {
this.name = name;
}
}
2) Bean class - all the member variables are private, has getters and setters and implements Serializable interface
public class Bean implements java.io.Serializable {
private String name;
private Integer age;
public String getName() {
return this.name;
}
public void setName(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
public Integer getAge() {
return this.age;
}
public void setAge(Integer age) {
this.age = age;
}
}
It also has a no-arg constructor.

Only difference is bean can be serialized.
From Java docs - http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/io/Serializable.html
Serializability of a class is enabled by the class implementing the java.io.Serializable interface. Classes that do not implement this interface will not have any of their state serialized or deserialized. All subtypes of a serializable class are themselves serializable. The serialization interface has no methods or fields and serves only to identify the semantics of being serializable.

the JavaBean class must implement either Serializable or Externalizable, must have a no-arg constructor,all JavaBean properties must public setter and getter methods (as appropriate)
all JavaBean instance variables should be private

How to deserialize JSON Array contained an abstract class without modifying a parent class?

I'm trying to deserialize JSON Array, which is persisted into my MongoDB, to a Java object by using Jackson. I found many tutorials mentioned to handle this polymorphism by adding:
#JsonTypeInfo(use=Id.CLASS,property="_class")
to a Super-class. However, in my case, I can't be able to modify the Super-class. So, are there some solutions to solve it without modifying the Super-class? Here is my code:
public class User {
#JsonProperty("_id")
private String id;
private List<Identity> identities; // <-- My List contains objects of an abstract class; Identity
public User(){
identities = new ArrayList<Identity>();
}
public static Iterable<User> findAllUsers(){
return users().find().as(User.class); // Always give me the errors
}
/*More code*/
}
It always give me the error - Can not construct instance of securesocial.core.Identity, problem: abstract types either need to be mapped to concrete types, have custom deserializer, or be instantiated with additional type information.

You can use #JsonDeserilize annotation to bind a concrete implementation class to an abstract class. If you cannot modify your abstract class you can use the Jackson Mix-in annotations to tell Jackson how to find the implementation class.
Here is an example:
public class JacksonAbstract {
public static class User {
private final String id;
private final List<Identity> identities;
#JsonCreator
public User(#JsonProperty("_id") String id, #JsonProperty("identities") List<Identity> identities) {
this.id = id;
this.identities = identities;
}
#JsonProperty("_id")
public String getId() {
return id;
}
public List<Identity> getIdentities() {
return identities;
}
}
public static abstract class Identity {
public abstract String getField();
}
#JsonDeserialize(as = IdentityImpl.class)
public static abstract class IdentityMixIn {
}
public static class IdentityImpl extends Identity {
private final String field;
public IdentityImpl(#JsonProperty("field") String field) {
this.field = field;
}
#Override
public String getField() {
return field;
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException {
User u = new User("myId", Collections.<Identity>singletonList(new IdentityImpl("myField")));
ObjectMapper mapper = new ObjectMapper();
mapper.addMixInAnnotations(Identity.class, IdentityMixIn.class);
String json = mapper.writerWithDefaultPrettyPrinter().writeValueAsString(u);
System.out.println(json);
System.out.println(mapper.readValue(json, User.class));
}
}

Jackson mapper with polymorphimsm

I have classes in following structure :
class Member {
public long id;
public String name;
public String type;
public Pet pet;
};
public abstract class Pet {
}
public CatPet extends Pet {
public int age;
public String color;
}
public DogPet extends Pet {
public int age;
public String breed;
}
I have to serialize the objects of class Member into JSON string and vice-versa. Can I somehow make the serialization such that serialization of object Pet in class Member will be dependent on member 'type'. If type = "cat" it should serialize/deserialize using class CatPet.

Yes, you typically use annotation #JsonTypeInfo on base class, to indicate how polymorphic type information is to be used. And with that, things will "just work".