We Keep Coding

Java ASM method override check

I have a problem with method override checks. I can detect simple override relations, but if the parent class has generics and the abstract method uses type parameters (return value/args), my code breaks down because the method description is not equal to the checked method.
Example:
public interface ISetting<T> {
public T method();
}
public class Setting implements ISetting<Integer> {
public Integer method() {
//Something
}
}
In ISetting, the method description is ()Ljava/lang/Object;
and in Setting, the method description is ()Ljava/lang/Integer;
How I can check this Override ?
On my head no thoughts come, how I can make this >~< All ideas which come to my head are bad (example: ignore check on desc, but overload method just break this idea)

Note that your issue does not only apply to generic supertype. You can also override a method with a more specific return type, with no Generics involved, e.g.
interface SomeInterface {
Object method();
}
class SomeImplementation implements SomeInterface {
#Override
public Integer method() {
return null;
}
}
You have to understand the concept of bridge methods.
A bridge method performs the task of overriding a method on the byte code level, having exactly the same parameter types and return type as the overridden method, and delegates to the actual implementation method.
Since the bridge method only consists of this invocation instruction, some type casts if required, and the return instruction, it is easy to parse such a method to find the actual method it belongs to, without dealing with the complex rules of the Generic type system.
Using, the following helper classes
record MethodSignature(String name, String desc) {}
record MethodInfo(int access, String owner, String name, String desc) {
MethodSignature signature() {
return new MethodSignature(name, desc);
}
}
final class MethodAndBridges {
MethodInfo actual;
final List<MethodInfo> bridges = new ArrayList<>();
MethodAndBridges(MethodSignature sig) {}
void set(MethodInfo mi) {
if(actual != null) throw new IllegalStateException();
actual = mi;
}
void addBridge(MethodInfo mi) {
bridges.add(mi);
}
}
We can gather the information in a form ready for checking override relations with the ASM library as follows:
class MethodCollector extends ClassVisitor {
static Map<MethodSignature, MethodAndBridges> getMethods(ClassReader cr) {
MethodCollector mc = new MethodCollector();
cr.accept(mc, ClassReader.SKIP_DEBUG | ClassReader.SKIP_FRAMES);
return mc.found;
}
final Map<MethodSignature, MethodAndBridges> found = new HashMap<>();
String owner, superClass;
List<String> interfaces;
protected MethodCollector() {
super(Opcodes.ASM9);
}
#Override
public void visit(int version, int acc,
String name, String sig, String superName, String[] ifNames) {
owner = name;
superClass = superName;
this.interfaces = ifNames == null? List.of(): List.of(ifNames);
}
#Override
public MethodVisitor visitMethod(
int acc, String name, String desc, String sig, String[] exceptions) {
MethodInfo mi = new MethodInfo(acc, owner, name, desc);
if((acc & Opcodes.ACC_BRIDGE) == 0) {
found.computeIfAbsent(mi.signature(), MethodAndBridges::new).set(mi);
return null;
}
return new MethodVisitor(Opcodes.ASM9) {
#Override public void visitMethodInsn(
int op, String owner, String name, String tDesc, boolean i) {
found.computeIfAbsent(new MethodSignature(name, tDesc),
MethodAndBridges::new).addBridge(mi);
}
};
}
}
To demonstrate how this work, let’s enhance your example, to address more cases
interface SupplierOfSerializable {
Serializable get();
}
interface ISetting<T extends CharSequence> extends Supplier<T>, Consumer<T> {
T get();
#Override void accept(T t);
Number method(int i);
static void method(Object o) {}
private void method(Number n) {}
}
class Setting implements ISetting<String>, SupplierOfSerializable {
public String get() {
return "";
}
#Override
public void accept(String t) {}
public Integer method(int i) {
return i;
}
static void method(Object o) {}
void method(Number n) {}
}
and check the override relations (only considering the direct interfaces, without recursion)
public class CheckOverride {
public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException {
MethodCollector mc = new MethodCollector();
new ClassReader(Setting.class.getName())
.accept(mc, ClassReader.SKIP_DEBUG | ClassReader.SKIP_FRAMES);
Map<MethodSignature, MethodAndBridges> implMethods = mc.found;
Map<MethodInfo, Set<MethodInfo>> overrides = new HashMap<>();
for(String ifType: mc.interfaces) {
Map<MethodSignature, MethodAndBridges> ifMethods
= MethodCollector.getMethods(new ClassReader(ifType));
System.out.println("interface " + ifType.replace('/', '.'));
printMethods(ifMethods);
System.out.println();
ifMethods.values().removeIf(CheckOverride::nonOverridable);
implMethods.forEach((sig, method) -> {
if(nonOverridable(method)) {
overrides.putIfAbsent(method.actual, Set.of());
return;
}
var overridden = ifMethods.get(sig);
if(overridden == null && method.bridges.isEmpty()) {
overrides.putIfAbsent(method.actual, Set.of());
return;
}
Set<MethodInfo> set = overrides.compute(method.actual,
(k, s) -> s == null || s.isEmpty()? new HashSet<>(): s);
if(overridden != null) set.add(overridden.actual);
for(var mi: method.bridges) {
overridden = ifMethods.get(mi.signature());
if(overridden != null) set.add(overridden.actual);
}
});
}
System.out.println("class " + mc.owner.replace('/', '.'));
printMethods(implMethods);
System.out.println();
System.out.println("Final result");
System.out.println("class " + mc.owner.replace('/', '.'));
overrides.forEach((m,overridden) -> {
System.out.println(" " + toDeclaration(m, false));
if(!overridden.isEmpty()) {
System.out.println(" overrides");
overridden.forEach(o ->
System.out.println(" " + toDeclaration(o, true)));
}
});
}
static boolean nonOverridable(MethodAndBridges m) {
return (m.actual.access() & (Opcodes.ACC_PRIVATE|Opcodes.ACC_STATIC)) != 0
|| m.actual.name().startsWith("<");
}
static void printMethods(Map<MethodSignature, MethodAndBridges> methods) {
methods.forEach((sig, methodAndBridges) -> {
System.out.println(" "+toDeclaration(methodAndBridges.actual,false));
if(!methodAndBridges.bridges.isEmpty()) {
System.out.println(" bridges");
for(MethodInfo mi: methodAndBridges.bridges) {
System.out.println(" " + toDeclaration(mi, false));
}
};
});
}
private static String toDeclaration(MethodInfo mi, boolean withType) {
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
sb.append(Modifier.toString(mi.access() & Modifier.methodModifiers()));
if(sb.length() > 0) sb.append(' ');
String clName = mi.owner();
var mt = MethodTypeDesc.ofDescriptor(mi.desc());
if(mi.name().equals("<init>"))
sb.append(clName, clName.lastIndexOf('/') + 1, clName.length());
else {
sb.append(mt.returnType().displayName()).append(' ');
if(withType) sb.append(clName.replace('/', '.')).append('.');
sb.append(mi.name());
}
if(mt.parameterCount() == 0) sb.append("()");
else {
String sep = "(";
for(ClassDesc cd: mt.parameterList()) {
sb.append(sep).append(cd.displayName());
sep = ", ";
}
sb.append(')');
}
return sb.toString();
}
}
interface ISetting
public static void method(Object)
public abstract void accept(CharSequence)
bridges
public void accept(Object)
public abstract Number method(int)
private void method(Number)
public abstract CharSequence get()
bridges
public Object get()
interface SupplierOfSerializable
public abstract Serializable get()
class Setting
Setting()
public Integer method(int)
bridges
public Number method(int)
public void accept(String)
bridges
public void accept(Object)
public void accept(CharSequence)
static void method(Object)
public String get()
bridges
public Object get()
public CharSequence get()
public Serializable get()
void method(Number)
Final result
class Setting
public String get()
overrides
public abstract Serializable SupplierOfSerializable.get()
public abstract CharSequence ISetting.get()
Setting()
public Integer method(int)
overrides
public abstract Number ISetting.method(int)
public void accept(String)
overrides
public abstract void ISetting.accept(CharSequence)
void method(Number)
static void method(Object)
The code uses newer Java features, like var, record, and the constant API, but I think, the result is straight-forward enough for converting it to older Java versions, if really required.

Looking for an implementation of an abstract method

I need to make a programm which is like a rally, theres 2 types of vehicles, motorcycle and cars, two types of motorcycle, with and without sidecar, the thing is that I need to verify if there is just a motorcycle in an array list, I mean, two wheels vehicle. That verification should be done in a method called esDe2Ruedas(), which is called by an abstract overrided method called check() that should be the one that verifies if a group of vehicles from an array are able to run in the rally, if its true all the elements of the array must be from the same type.
Here is the code
this is how the program arrays the vehicles
GrandPrix gp1 = new GrandPrix();
gp1.agregar(v1);
//gp1.mostrar(v1);
gp1.agregar(v2);
System.out.println(gp1.check());
GrandPrix gp2 = new GrandPrix();
gp2.agregar(vt1);
gp2.agregar(vt2);
gp2.agregar(m2);
System.out.println(gp2.check());
GrandPrix gp3 = new GrandPrix();
gp3.agregar(vt1);
gp3.agregar(vt2);
gp3.agregar(m1);
System.out.println(gp3.check());
GrandPrix gp4 = new GrandPrix();
gp4.agregar(m1);
gp4.agregar(m2);
System.out.println(gp4.check());
This is the class that is using
import java.util.ArrayList;
public class GrandPrix extends Rally{
ArrayList<Vehiculo> ve = new ArrayList<Vehiculo>();
public void agregar(Vehiculo v) {
ve.add(v);
}
public void agregar(Carro c) {
ve.add(c);
}
public void agregar(Moto m) {
ve.add(m);
}
#Override
boolean check() {// HERE I VERIFY IF THE VEHICLES ARE COMPATIBLE
return false;
}
}
This is the class where everything goes on
public class Vehiculo {
private String Nombre;
private double velocidad_max;
private int peso;
private int comb;
public Vehiculo() {
setNombre("Anónimo");
setVel(130);
setPeso(1000);
setComb(0);
}
public Vehiculo(String string, double d, int i, int j) {
setNombre(string);
setVel(d);
setPeso(i);
setComb(j);
}
double rendimiento() {
return velocidad_max/peso;
}
public boolean mejor(Vehiculo otroVehiculo) {
return rendimiento()>otroVehiculo.rendimiento();
}
public String toString() {
return getNombre()+"-> Velocidad máxima = "+getVel()+" km/h, Peso = "+getPeso()+" kg";
}
/**************************************
---------SET And GET Nombre------------
***************************************/
public String getNombre() {
return Nombre;
}
public void setNombre(String nuevoNombre) {
this.Nombre=nuevoNombre;
}
/**************************************
---------SET And GET velocidad_max------------
***************************************/
public double getVel() {
return velocidad_max;
}
public void setVel(double nuevaVel) {
this.velocidad_max=nuevaVel;
}
/**************************************
---------SET And GET peso------------
***************************************/
public double getPeso() {
return peso;
}
public void setPeso(int nuevoPeso) {
this.peso=nuevoPeso;
}
/**************************************
---------SET And GET comb------------
***************************************/
public int getComb() {
return comb;
}
public void setComb(int comb) {
this.comb = comb;
}
boolean esDe2Ruedas() {
return false;
}
}
This is the class of motorcycles, which is in theory the same as the car's class, without sidecar thing
public class Moto extends Vehiculo{
private boolean sidecar;
public Moto(String string, double d, int i, int j) {
setNombre(string);
setVel(d);
setPeso(i);
setComb(j);
setSidecar(false);
}
public Moto(String string, double d, int i, int j, boolean b) {
setNombre(string);
setVel(d);
setPeso(i);
setComb(j);
setSidecar(b);
esDe2Ruedas(false);
}
public String toString() {
String str = null;
if(isSidecar())
str =super.toString()+", Moto, con sidecar";
else
str =super.toString()+", Moto";
return str;
}
public boolean isSidecar() {
return sidecar;
}
public void setSidecar(boolean sidecar) {
this.sidecar = sidecar;
}

I guess what you presented is what is given. If you came up with the design it is ok, but I believe it could be improved. Anyway, I try to respond to what I believe was your question straight away.
Vehiculo is the super type of Moto (which can have a side car and becomes 3 wheeler).
Vehiculo has a method esDe2Ruedas, which returns false.
Moto inherits that method <-- this is wrong, it should override it and, depending on side car, return the expected boolean value.
In the check method you can now distinguish between Moto and "Moto with sidecar" by using that method.

Java Class Inheritance and comparing subclass objects

I'm working on a homework assignment, and I'm having a really hard time wrapping my head around how to compare two of the same subclass objects.
Basically I have this superclass Magnitude:
class Magnitude {
public boolean lessThan(Magnitude m) {
}
public boolean lessThanEqualTo(Magnitude m) {
}
public boolean equalTo(Magnitude m) {
}
public boolean greaterThan(Magnitude m) {
}
public boolean notEqual(Magnitude m) {
}
}
And then I have a subclass Currency that extends Magnitude ( I am only allowed to override the lessThan() method):
class Currency extends Magnitude {
double amount;
public Currency(double amt) {
this.amount = amt;
}
#Override
public boolean lessThan(Magnitude m) {
Currency other_currency = (Currency) m;
if (this.amount < other_currency.amount) {
return true;
}
else {
return false
}
}
public void print() {
System.out.println(amount);
}
}
What exactly is the way that I should implement these methods for the super and subclass so that I can compare 2 objects of the same subclass?

You can make use of the fact that you can call lessThan() also from m and use this as the other argument.
abstract class Magnitude {
public abstract boolean lessThan(Magnitude m);
public boolean lessThanEqualTo(Magnitude m) {
return this.lessThan(m) || this.equalTo(m);
}
public boolean equalTo(Magnitude m) {
return ((!this.lessThan(m))&&(!m.lessThan(this)));
}
public boolean greaterThan(Magnitude m) {
return m.lessThen(this);
}
public boolean notEqual(Magnitude m) {
return !this.equal(m);
}
}
You then need to have
class Currency extends Magnitude {
double amount;
public Currency(double amt) {
this.amount = amt;
}
#Override
public boolean lessThan(Magnitude m) {
Currency other_currency = (Currency) m;
if (this.amount < other_currency.amount) {
return true;
}
else {
return false
}
}
public void print() {
System.out.println(amount);
}
}

Simply rewrite the methods at the subclass.
Now, if you create two instances of the subclass and compare them, it'll use the subclass method
Currency c1 = new Currency();
Currency c2 = new Currency();
c1.lessThan(c2); //will call Currency.lessThan method
To use parent's class method, use this way
c1.lessThan((Magnitude) c2);
See this form more info.

If I understand your question correctly, you want to know how to implement and override the lessThan() method in your Currency class, knowing you can only compare currencies but not magnitudes, but what you receive is a Magnitude type parameter.
In that case, you need to check if the Magnitude object you received as a paramether is actually an instance of Currency wrapped in a Magnitude class. To do that, you use the instanceof comparison operator and then cast the object to Currency:
#Override
public boolean lessThan(Magnitude m) {
if(m instanceof Currency) {
return this.amount < ((Currency)m).amount;
} else {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Parameter is not a Currency");
}
}

Unique classes in generic list

I have a generic class with a generic list in it. I want to ensure that the generic list only contains unique classes.
What I have done so far is to compare the class names with reflection (getClass()). But I think that's not a clean solution. Are there any better practices to check?
public class MyGenericClass<T extends MyGenericClass.MyInterface> {
private List<T> members = new ArrayList<>(0);
public void add(T t) {
final boolean[] classInMembers = {false};
members.forEach(member -> {
if (member.getClass().getName().equals(t.getClass().getName())) {
classInMembers[0] = true;
}
});
if (!classInMembers[0]) {
members.add(t);
}
}
public interface MyInterface {
void doSomething(String text);
}
}
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) {
MyGenericClass<MyGenericClass.MyInterface> myGenericClass = new MyGenericClass<>();
myGenericClass.add(new Performer1());
myGenericClass.add(new Performer2());
myGenericClass.add(new Performer3());
myGenericClass.add(new Performer3()); // should not be inserted!
}
private static class Performer1 implements MyGenericClass.MyInterface {
#Override
public void doSomething(String text) {
text = "Hi, I am performer 1!";
}
}
private static class Performer2 implements MyGenericClass.MyInterface {
#Override
public void doSomething(String text) {
text = "Hi, I am performer 2!";
}
}
private static class Performer3 implements MyGenericClass.MyInterface {
#Override
public void doSomething(String text) {
text = "Hi, I am performer 3!";
}
}
}

You could subclass a java.util.Set interface implementation. It will likely be easiest to subclass java.util.AbstractSet.
By default 'Set' will compare objects by their .equals() method - In your case, this is not sufficient. You will need to override the contains method to ensure that only instances of a unique class are added.
In your overrideen contains, it's probably the same / easier to compare class instances rather than their stringified package name
I.e. use a.getClass() == b.getClass(), rather than a.getClass().getName()

Don't use a List, use a java.util.Set instead.
A collection that contains no duplicate elements. More formally, sets contain no pair of elements e1 and e2 such that e1.equals(e2), and at most one null element.
If the iteration order is important or if you want to use a custom Comparator, the TreeSet implementation can be used:
A NavigableSet implementation based on a TreeMap. The elements are ordered using their natural ordering, or by a Comparator provided at set creation time, depending on which constructor is used.
Example of a Set using a Comparator:
class MyComparator implements Comparator<Object> {
#Override
public int compare(Object e1, Object e2) {
if (e1.getClass() == e2.getClass())
return 0;
//if you wish to have some extra sort order
return e1.getClass().getName().compareTo(e2.getClass().getName());
}
}
. . .
Set mySet = new TreeSet<Object>(new MyComparator());
mySet.add(new Object());
mySet.add(new Object());//same class already in set
mySet.add("wtf");
//mySet.size() is now 2 - the second "new Object()" was not inserted due to the comparator check

Why so complicated?
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) {
final Class<?> helloClass = "Hello".getClass();
final Class<?> worldClass = "World".getClass();
final Class<?> intClass = Integer.class;
System.out.println(helloClass.equals(worldClass)); // -> true
System.out.println(helloClass.equals(intClass)); // -> false
}
}

You could maintain a roster of members in a Set.
public static class MyGenericClass<T extends MyGenericClass.MyInterface> {
private List<T> members = new ArrayList<>(0);
// Add this.
private Set<Class<?>> roster = new HashSet<>();
public void add(T t) {
if (!roster.contains(t.getClass())) {
members.add(t);
roster.add(t.getClass());
}
}
private void soundOff() {
for (T t : members) {
t.doSomething();
}
}
public interface MyInterface {
void doSomething();
}
}
private static class Performer implements MyGenericClass.MyInterface {
final int n;
public Performer(int n) {
this.n = n;
}
#Override
public void doSomething() {
System.out.println("Hi, I am a " + this.getClass().getSimpleName() + "(" + n + ")");
}
}
private static class Performer1 extends Performer {
public Performer1(int n) {
super(n);
}
}
private static class Performer2 extends Performer {
public Performer2(int n) {
super(n);
}
}
private static class Performer3 extends Performer {
public Performer3(int n) {
super(n);
}
}
public void test() {
MyGenericClass<MyGenericClass.MyInterface> myGenericClass = new MyGenericClass<>();
myGenericClass.add(new Performer1(1));
myGenericClass.add(new Performer2(2));
myGenericClass.add(new Performer3(3));
myGenericClass.add(new Performer3(4)); // should not be inserted!
myGenericClass.soundOff();
}

You could implement a Wrapper which provides the necessary comparison and add the wrapped instance to the set. This way you don't have to override equals and hashcode in your concrete Performer classes and you don't have to subclass a concrete Set implementation (which you are coupled to. When you subclass a HashSet, you have to use that concrete class. But what if you want to use a LinkedHashSet at some point? You have to override LinkedHashSet as well) , which may be fragile since you have to make sure that the overridden method is consistent with the rest of the class.
class MyGenericClass<T extends MyInterface> {
private Set<ClassCompareWrapper<T>> members = new HashSet<>();
public void add(T t) {
members.add(new ClassCompareWrapper<T>(t));
}
}
class ClassCompareWrapper<T> {
T t;
public ClassCompareWrapper(T t) {
this.t = t;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (this == o)
return true;
if (!(o instanceof ClassCompareWrapper))
return false;
ClassCompareWrapper<?> that = (ClassCompareWrapper<?>) o;
return Objects.equals(t.getClass(), that.t.getClass());
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
return Objects.hash(t.getClass());
}
#Override
public String toString() {
return "Wrapper{" +
"t=" + t +
'}';
}
}

Here are a few other ideas.
Using streams:
public void add(T t) {
if (!members.stream().anyMatch(m -> m.getClass() == t.getClass())) {
members.add(t);
}
}
Using AbstractSet and HashMap:
class ClassSet<E> extends AbstractSet<E> {
private final Map<Class<?>, E> map = new HashMap<>();
#Override
public boolean add(E e) {
// this can be
// return map.putIfAbsent(e.getClass(), e) != null;
// in Java 8
Class<?> clazz = e.getClass();
if (map.containsKey(clazz)) {
return false;
} else {
map.put(clazz, e);
return true;
}
}
#Override
public boolean remove(Object o) {
return map.remove(o.getClass()) != null;
}
#Override
public boolean contains(Object o) {
return map.containsKey(o.getClass());
}
#Override
public int size() {
return map.size();
}
#Override
public Iterator<E> iterator() {
return map.values().iterator();
}
}
A HashMap could also be used without wrapping it in a Set. The Set interface is defined around equals and hashCode, so any implementation which deviates from this is technically non-contractual. Additionally, you might want to use LinkedHashMap if the values are iterated often.

How to write a method that returns an instance of an abstract class?

I am a beginner in Java and i trying to understand the abstract classes.
Below is the code that I've written; the question is: how do i write a method that will return an instance of that class.
public abstract class VehicleEngine
{
protected String name;
protected double fabricationCons;
protected double consum;
protected int mileage;
public VehicleEngine(String n, double fC)
{
name = n;
fabricationCons = fC;
mileage = 0;
consum = 0;
}
private void setFabricationCons(double fC)
{
fabricationCons = fC;
}
public abstract double currentConsum();
public String toString()
{
return name + " : " + fabricationCons + " : " + currentConsum();
}
public void addMileage(int km)
{
mileage += km;
}
public double getFabricationConsum()
{
return fabricationCons;
}
public String getName()
{
return name;
}
public int getMileage()
{
return mileage;
}
//public VehicleEngine get(String name){
//if(getName().equals(name)){
//return VehicleEngine;
//}
//return null;
//}
}
public class BenzinVehicle extends VehicleEngine
{
public BenzinVehicle(String n, double fC)
{
super(n, fC);
}
#Override
public double currentConsum()
{
if (getMileage() >= 75000) {
consum = getFabricationConsum() + 0.4;
} else {
consum = getFabricationConsum();
}
return consum;
}
}
public class DieselVehicle extends VehicleEngine
{
public DieselVehicle(String n, double fC)
{
super(n, fC);
}
#Override
public double currentConsum()
{
int cons = 0;
if (getMileage() < 5000) {
consum = getFabricationConsum();
} else {
consum = getFabricationConsum() + (getFabricationConsum() * (0.01 * (getMileage() / 5000)));
}
return consum;
}
}
This is the main.
public class Subject2
{
public static void main(String[] args)
{
VehicleEngine c1 = new BenzinVehicle("Ford Focus 1.9", 5.0);
DieselVehicle c2 = new DieselVehicle("Toyota Yaris 1.4D", 4.0);
BenzinVehicle c3 = new BenzinVehicle("Citroen C3 1.6",5.2);
c1.addMileage(30000);
c1.addMileage(55700);
c2.addMileage(49500);
c3.addMileage(35400);
System.out.println(c1);
System.out.println(c2);
System.out.println(VehicleEngine.get("Citroen C3 1.6")); //this is the line with problems
System.out.println(VehicleEngine.get("Ford Focus "));
}
}
And the output should be:
Ford Focus 1.9 : 5.0 : 5.4
Toyota Yaris 1.4D : 4.0 : 4.36
Citroen C3 1.6 : 5.2 : 5.2
null

You can not return an instance of an abstract class, by definition. What you can do, is return an instance of one of the concrete (non-abstract) subclasses that extend it. For example, inside the VehicleEngine you can create a factory that returns instances given the type of the instance and the expected parameters, but those instances will necessarily have to be concrete subclasses of VehicleEngine

Have a look at the Factory Method pattern. Your concrete classes will implement an abstract method that returns a class instance.

Abstract classes do not keep a list of their instances. Actually no Java class does that. If you really want to do that, you could add a static map to VehicleEngine like this:
private static Map<String, VehicleEngine> instanceMap = new HashMap<String, VehicleEngine>();
and change your get method to a static one like this:
public static VehicleEngine get(String name) {
return instanceMap.get(name);
}
and add this line to the end of the constructor of VehicleEngine:
VehicleEngine.instanceMap.put(n, this);
this way every new instance created puts itself into the static map. However this actually is not a good way to implement such a functionality. You could try to use a factory to create instances, or you could consider converting this class into an enum if you will have a limited predefined number of instances.