Having issue in Java,
we can call class methods like
interface samp{
public void printMsg();
}
ClassA implements samp{
public void printMsg()
{
S.o.p("Hi ClassA");
}
}
ClassB implements samp{
public void printMsg()
{
S.o.p("Hi ClassB");
}
}
public MainClass{
public static void main(String args())
{
samp s= new ClassA();
s.printMsg();
samp s= new ClassB();
s.printMsg();
}
}
we can do this, am having different type of class method not similar methods for all classes but I want to implement the future is it possible to do? is any other pattern for this, pls help me to find this.
like
ClassA{
public void fun1(){..}
public void fun2(){..}
}
ClassB{
public void fun3(){..}
public void fun4(){..}
}
want to call these methods using a single refrence, need to asign object to that refrence dynamically is it possible friends?...
Thanks in advance
You cant do that using common interface.You can only call the method which is defined in interface using an interface reference type, even though the object it points to belong to another class have different other methods.
you can call only those class function which are defined in interface because its reference can access only those functions. ex:
interface samp{
public void printMsg();
}
ClassA implements samp{
public void printMsg()
{
S.o.p("Hi ClassA");
}
public void newmthd(){
S.o.p("you can't call me from samp reference.");
}
}
ClassB implements samp{
public void printMsg()
{
S.o.p("Hi ClassB");
}
}
public MainClass{
public static void main(String args())
{
samp s= new ClassA();
s.printMsg();
s.newmthd() //error... s don't have any knowledge of this function.
samp s= new ClassB();
s.printMsg();
}
}
Define all the methods you want your reference to have in an a superclass, but leave the implementations empty. Then, create your subclass and override the necessary methods.
Example:
Class MySuperClass {
public void fun1() {}
public void fun2() {}
public void fun3() {}
public void fun4() {}
}
Class ClassA extends MySuperClass {
public void fun1() { //implementation details }
public void fun2() { //implementation details }
}
Class ClassB extends MySuperClass {
public void fun3() { //implementation details }
public void fun4() { //implementation details }
}
public Class Tester {
public static void main(String[] args) {
MySuperClass class1 = new ClassA();
MySuperClass class2 = new ClassB();
}
}
Related
class SomeClass {
public void someMethod(){}
public void otherMethod(){
//Calling someMethod()
}
}
Whats the difference when you call an instance method as:
--> someMethod(); OR this.someMethod();
vs
--> SomeClass.this.someMethod();
There is no difference from doing:
//...
public void otherMethod(){
someMethod();
}
//...
to doing
//...
public void otherMethod(){
this.someMethod(); // `this` in this case refers to the class instance
}
//...
Now if you would have
class SomeClass {
public static void someMethod(){}
public void otherMethod(){
//Calling someMethod()
}
}
you could do:
//...
public void otherMethod(){
SomeClass.someMethod(); // as the method is static you don't need to call it from an instance using `this` or omitting the class
}
//...
And lastly this syntax SomeClass.this.someMethod(); would not be correct in all scenarios. An example of where this could be used (correct) is as follow:
class SomeClass {
public void someMethod(){}
public void otherMethod(){
//Calling someMethod()
}
class OtherClass {
public OtherClass() {
// OtherClass#someMethod hides SomeClass#someMethod so in order to call it it must be done like this
SomeClass.this.someMethod();
}
public void someMethod(){}
}
}
I am new to this concept, i know the property of interface and abstract.
when i explain the concept to my friends, they asked me to create abstract class inside the interface.
please tell me , is it possible to create abstract class inside the interface.
i googled, but i am not able find the exact answer for my question.
i tried the below code ,but i dont know how to cal the AbstractMethod.
interface Student {
public abstract class Subject {
public void AbstractMethod(){
System.out.println("hi");
}
}
}
class Data implements Student {
public void ClassMethod() {
System.out.println("method 2");
}
}
public class NewClass {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Data s=new Data();
Student.Subject obj=new Student.Subject();// compiler error
s.ClassMethod();
}
}
Wouldn't something like this be better?
interface Student {
public abstract void sayHi();
}
class Data implements Student {
#Override
public void sayHi() {
System.out.println("method 2");
}
}
Yes, you can. Here in the below example, I used Anonymous Class but you can use Lambda Expression also
interface Student {
public abstract class Subject {
public abstract void AbstractMethod();
public void show(){
System.out.println("Show Method");
}
}
}
class Data implements Student {
public void ClassMethod() {
System.out.println("method 2");
}
}
public class NewClass {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Data s=new Data();
Student.Subject obj=new Student.Subject(){
public void AbstractMethod(){
System.out.println("hi");
}
};
obj.show();
obj.AbstractMethod();
s.ClassMethod();
}
}
interface Y {
void search(String name);
}
class A implements Y {
void search(String name) {
//Is it possible to say: "If I was called from class B then do a search("B");
}
}
class B extends A {
}
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) {
B b = new B();
b.search();
}
}
Given the above code is it possible to reason in superclass which subclass was used for calling a method?
The reason I want to do this is because the code in Search is very similar for all Subclasses, the only thing that changes is the Classname, so I thought there is no need to Override in each subclass. I have updated the code to reflect this. Please let me know if there is a better way of doing it/
Calling this.getClass() inside your search method will give you the concrete class of the current instance.
For example:
class Example
{
static class A {
public void search() {
System.out.println(getClass());
}
}
static class B extends A {}
public static void main (String[] args) throws java.lang.Exception
{
new A().search();
new B().search();
}
}
outputs
class Example$A
class Example$B
The cleanest way to do it is to override the method in each subclass.
interface Y {
void search();
}
class A implements Y {
public void search(){
search("A");
}
protected void search(String name) {
// implement your searching algoithm here
}
}
class B extends A {
public void search(){
search("B");
}
}
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) {
B b = new B();
b.search();
}
}
That's the way inheritance is suppose to works. A super class should not know its subclasses.
And, in case you extends your class B, you can easily either:
-Keep the same behaviour as B:
class C extends B {
// do nothing, when calling search, it calls the method implemented in B
}
-Change the behaviour to search for "C"
class C extends B {
public void search(){
search("C"); // or search("whateveryouwant")
}
}
You can simply override the method in class B.
The other way could be to write the search() method as
void search() {
if (this.getClass().equals(B.class)) {
//The logic for B
} else if (this.getClass().equals(A.class)) {
//The logic for A
}
}
You have to provide the fully qualified name for the class.
Better follow template pattern.
interface Y {
void search(String name);
}
abstract class AbstractionTemplate implements Y{
#Override
public void search(String name) {
//a lot of code.
System.out.println("common stuff start");
doImplspecificStuffOnly();
System.out.println("common stuff end");
//a lot of code.
}
abstract void doImplspecificStuffOnly();
}
class A extends AbstractionTemplate{
#Override
void doImplspecificStuffOnly() {
System.out.println("a's stuff");
}
}
class B extends A {
#Override
void doImplspecificStuffOnly() {
System.out.println("B's stuff");
}
}
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) {
B b = new B();
b.search("hey");
}
}
Can Someone tell me with an example why an class should be defined inside an interface.
The below is the simple code i was trying.
interface Watsapp
{
class A
{
public void Validate()
{
}
};
abstract public void SendText();
public void SendPic();
};
its totally depends on logic requirements.
whenever we declare inner class, it treats as a data member so here also you can treat this class as a data member
just assume scenario some one needs object of A inside Interface and there is no class right now.
see eg.
public interface Watsapp
{
class A
{
public void Validate()
{
}
public String iDoSomething()
{
return "i did";
}
};
public A objOfA = new A();
abstract public void SendText();
public void SendPic();
};
And main Class is bellow:
public class TestMain {
public static void main(String[] str){
System.out.println( Watsapp.objOfA.iDoSomething());
}
}
mostly people create anonymous class for one time use, but here You created a class with name.
see:
public interface Watsapp
{
/*class A
{
public void Validate()
{
}
public String iDoSomething()
{
return "i did";
}
};*/
Thread t = new Thread()
{
public void run() {
// something ...
}
};
abstract public void SendText();
public void SendPic();
};
Thank you.
I'm developing an application which builds on a class written by another developer (for which I do not have the source).
I wish to use all of the functionality of said class but also to extend it with additional functionality. Ordinarily to achieve this I would have defined an interface (MyInterface) and have extended the external class (TheirClass) from my own (MyClass) while implementing MyInterface.
public interface TheirClassInterface {
public void theirMethod1();
public void theirMethod2();
}
public class TheirClass implements TheirClassInterface {
public void theirMethod1() { ... }
public void theirMethod2() { ... }
}
public class TheirOtherClass {
public void theirOtherMethod1(TheirClassInterface o) { ... }
}
public interface MyInterface() {
public void myMethod1();
}
public class MyClass extends TheirClass implements MyInterface {
public void myMethod1() { ... }
}
public class MyNewClass extends MyClass {
public void MyNewClassMethod() { ... }
}
The problem is complicated by the fact that:
I now wish to create a new class (MyNewClass) which adds additional functionality to MyClass but I don't want my code to be dependent on TheirClass.
I wish to be able to use my class as a parameter to the method of TheirOtherClass.
To combat this I refactored my code to instead use composition over inheritance and implementing TheirClassInterface. This works but requires me to implement many methods and delegate them to theirClassObject (in reality TheirClassInterface contains a very large number of methods).
public interface TheirClassInterface {
public void theirMethod1();
public void theirMethod2();
}
public class TheirClass implements TheirClassInterface {
public void theirMethod1() { ... }
public void theirMethod2() { ... }
}
public class TheirOtherClass {
public void theirOtherMethod1(TheirClassInterface o) { ... }
}
public interface MyInterface() {
public void myMethod1();
}
public class MyClass implements TheirClassInterface, MyInterface {
private TheirClass theirClassObject;
public void myMethod1() { ... }
public void theirMethod1() { theirClassObject.theirMethod1(); }
public void theirMethod2() { theirClassObject.theirMethod2(); }
}
public class MyNewClass extends MyClass {
public void MyNewClassMethod() { ... }
}
My question is whether my approach is appropriate in this case and whether it could be improved upon as it seems to me that my code uses an excessive amount of delegation to get the job done.
Many thanks for any guidance anyone can give on this.
Danny
First, as java is a strongly-typed single inheritance language, you cannot escape the delegation.
But you can avoid having to write a lot of delegation CODE, by using a dirty little trick with Proxies and reflection.
Code follows
public interface Interface1 {
void m1();
}
public interface Interface2 {
void m2();
}
public class Class1 implements Interface1 {
public void m1() {
System.out.println(1);
}
}
public class Class2 implements Interface2 {
public void m2() {
System.out.println(2);
}
}
public interface MixinInterface extends Interface1, Interface2 {
}
And this is how the magic happens
package j.with.pseudo.multiple.inheritance;
import java.lang.reflect.InvocationHandler;
import java.lang.reflect.Method;
import java.lang.reflect.Proxy;
public class MixinBuilder {
public static Object buildMixed(Class _interface, Object... impls){
InvocationHandler h = new MixinHandler(_interface.getInterfaces(), impls);
return Proxy.newProxyInstance(MixinBuilder.class.getClassLoader(),
new Class[]{_interface}, h);
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Class1 o1 = new Class1();
Class2 o2 = new Class2();
MixinInterface almost_like_multiple_inheritance_guy =
(MixinInterface) buildMixed(MixinInterface.class, o1, o2);
almost_like_multiple_inheritance_guy.m1();
almost_like_multiple_inheritance_guy.m2();
}
private static class MixinHandler implements InvocationHandler{
private Class[] interfaces;
private Object[] impls;
public MixinHandler(Class[] interfaces, Object[] impls) {
this.interfaces = interfaces;
this.impls = impls;
}
public Object invoke(Object proxy, Method method, Object[] args)
throws Throwable {
int i=0;
for(Class _interface : interfaces){
if(method.getDeclaringClass().isAssignableFrom(_interface)){
return method.invoke(impls[i], args);
}
i++;
}
// TODO Auto-generated method stub
throw new RuntimeException("Method not found: "+method);
}
}
}
Pretty cool huh? :-)
You can't not-depend on a class if you're extending it; it's like having a definition of Human, which does not depend on the definition of Mammal, your optinos are to rewrite everything in the parent, or depend on it.
Many thanks for the answers so far. I've come up with a solution which I think seems reasonable and allows me to fully encapsulate the foreign class.
At the moment I've returned to the method discussed in the first block of code (repeated and extended below) and am now implementing my MyInterface interface for MyNewClass and delegating all interface operations to a composed object. The object to delegate to is decided at runtime by calling a static method on a Factory.
public interface TheirClassInterface {
public void theirMethod1();
public void theirMethod2();
}
public class TheirClass implements TheirClassInterface {
public void theirMethod1() { ... }
public void theirMethod2() { ... }
}
public class TheirOtherClass {
public void theirOtherMethod1(TheirClassInterface o) { ... }
}
public interface MyInterface() {
public void myMethod1();
}
public class MyClass extends TheirClass implements MyInterface {
public void myMethod1() { ... }
}
public class MyNewClass implements MyInterface {
private MyInterface myObject;
public MyNewClass() {
myObject = MyClassFactory.createMyClass();
}
public void myMethod1() {
myObject.myMethod();
}
public void MyNewClassMethod() { ... }
}
Once again, thanks for the ideas. I'm now going to look into them all and see if I can use them to improve my code.
Cheers,
Danny