I'm new to Java and have the following question regarding inner classes:
When implementing an inner class, do I need to declare its attributes and methods scope i.e. public, private, protected?
EDIT: With the absence of delegates (as in C#) could someone mention how best to implement a messaging system in Java that enables communication between multiple forms (Jframe)?
I have read that I can use inner classes for this but I'm also told I should not implement inner classes more than a few lines in size. Which school should I follow?
If you want to.
An inner class is roughly speaking like any other class. (Except that if you don't declare it static, it will have an EnclosingClass.this reference.)
I would suggest treating inner classes as private.
In Java, an outer class and all of its nested (including inner) classes can fiddle with each others privates. (The generated bytecode may be pointlessly verbose with additional synthetic access methods, but this is highly unlikely to matter.)
From an interface point of view, a class having weird inner class types is a bit weird. And more difficult to test if you are into that sort of thing. Too often nested type are created because creating a new file in a bad IDE is a bit of a pain - don't be tempted with nasty shortcuts.
Having said that inner classes are very useful. Use them with taste.
when implementing a inner class do i need to declare its attributes and methods scope i.e. public, private, protected?
It depends completely on how you wanted the inner class to behave.
By default, an inner class is non-static:
public class Example1
{
int a;
public class Example2
{
int b;
void test () {}
}
}
A non-static inner class can be instantiated only inside a non-static method of the outer class. This is because every instance of a non-static inner class must be associated with an instance of the outer class. In a sense, every instance of a non-static inner class exists ``inside'' an instance of the outer class. A single instance of the outer class may have associated with it more than one instance of the inner class.
Because an instance of a non-static inner class has an associated instance of the outer class, the methods of the inner class can access directly any of the members (fields or methods) of the outer class instance. For example, the test method defined above can access both a and b directly
A class defined within another class is called a nested class. Like other members of a class, a nested class can be declared static or not. A nonstatic nested class is called an inner class. An instance of an inner class can exist only within an instance of its enclosing class and has access to its enclosing class's members even if they are declared private.
The following table shows the types of nested classes:
Types of Nested Classes Type Scope Inner
static nested class member no
inner [non-static] class member yes
local class local yes
anonymous class only the point
where it is
defined yes
Although this is not an answer your question but make sure you are aware of the "static" modifier of inner classes.
public class Stuff {
public static class SubStuff {
//private or protected
}
}
Is different than this:
public class Stuff {
public class SubStuff {
//only private
}
}
If you have a static inner class than you might want protected variables, protected methods so on. But for inner classes that are not static generally you want everything private.
Google for the difference.
Inner can be seen by only the enclosing class. Its mostly used to achieve a utility function within the class. Lets use Door and Password as example.
public class Door {
public boolean isPassword(String key) {
//local inner class - its hidden from the world
class Password{
public boolean isPassword(String key) {
if(!key.equals("xyz")) {
System.out.println("Not Password. Door is locked");
return false;
}else {
System.out.println("Password corect. Door is opened");
return true;
}
}
}
return new Password().isPassword(key);
}
}
Related
Here are two statements I found concerning inner classes
JavaDocs:
As with instance methods and variables, an inner class is associated
with an instance of its enclosing class and has direct access to that
object's methods and fields. Also, because an inner class is
associated with an instance, it cannot define any static members
itself.
On another site I found this:
A nested class, for the most part, is just that—a class declared in
the definition of an enclosing class. It does not inherit anything
from the enclosing class, and an instance of the nested class cannot
be assigned to a variable reference to the enclosing class.
Aren't the bold marked lines contradicting?
How can you not inherit a surrounding objects fields and methods and at the same time have access to its fields and methods?
No, they do not conflict. Look at the following example:
public class A {
public void foo() {
//some code
}
public class B {
public void bar() {
foo();
}
}
}
In this example, the innerclass B can access the method of A (or any of its' fields, actually), but in no way does inheritance takes place.
For instance, the following change to B would result in a compilation error:
public class B {
public void bar() {
super.foo();
}
}
Because B does not inherit from A. It can access its' instance members, but it does not extend (inherit) from it.
Please do not see the terms nested class and inner class as an opposite or something similar. In fact, a nested class simply describes all sorts of classes that are declared inside another class:
Nested classes that are declared static are simply called static nested classes.
Non-static nested classes are called inner classes. There are three types of them (see JLS §8.1.3 for more info):
A non-static member class.
A local class.
An anonymous class.
The first paragraph you quoted explains that an inner class has access (read: access, not inherit) to the methods and fields of the enclosing instance. Note, it is about an instance, not the class.
The second paragraph tries to explain that there is no relationship between a class and a nested class inside it, except for their locations.
class OuterClass {
class InnerClass {
static int i = 100; // compile error
static void f() { } // compile error
}
}
Although it's not possible to access the static field with OuterClass.InnerClass.i, if I want to record something that should be static, e.g. the number of InnerClass objects created, it would be helpful to make that field static. So why does Java prohibit static fields/methods in inner classes?
EDIT: I know how to make the compiler happy with static nested class (or static inner class), but what I want to know is why java forbids static fields/methods inside inner classes (or ordinary inner class) from both the language design and implementation aspects, if someone knows more about it.
what I want to know is why java forbids static fields/methods inside inner classes
Because those inner classes are "instance" inner classes. That is, they are like an instance attribute of the enclosing object.
Since they're "instance" classes, it doesn't make any sense to allow static features, for static is meant to work without an instance in the first place.
It's like you try to create a static/instance attribute at the same time.
Take the following example:
class Employee {
public String name;
}
If you create two instances of employee:
Employee a = new Employee();
a.name = "Oscar";
Employee b = new Employee();
b.name = "jcyang";
It is clear why each one has its own value for the property name, right?
The same happens with the inner class; each inner class instance is independent of the other inner class instance.
So if you attempt to create a counter class attribute, there is no way to share that value across two different instances.
class Employee {
public String name;
class InnerData {
static count; // ??? count of which ? a or b?
}
}
When you create the instance a and b in the example above, what would be a correct value for the static variable count? It is not possible to determine it, because the existence of the InnerData class depends completely on each of the enclosing objects.
That's why, when the class is declared as static, it doesn't need anymore a living instance, to live itself. Now that there is no dependency, you may freely declare a static attribute.
I think this sounds reiterative but if you think about the differences between instance vs. class attributes, it will make sense.
The idea behind inner classes is to operate in the context of the enclosing instance. Somehow, allowing static variables and methods contradicts this motivation?
8.1.2 Inner Classes and Enclosing Instances
An inner class is a nested class that is not explicitly or implicitly declared static. Inner classes may not declare static initializers (§8.7) or member interfaces. Inner classes may not declare static members, unless they are compile-time constant fields (§15.28).
InnerClass cannot have static members because it belongs to an instance (of OuterClass). If you declare InnerClass as static to detach it from the instance, your code will compile.
class OuterClass {
static class InnerClass {
static int i = 100; // no compile error
static void f() { } // no compile error
}
}
BTW: You'll still be able to create instances of InnerClass. static in this context allows that to happen without an enclosing instance of OuterClass.
From Java 16 onwards, this is no longer the case. Quoting from JEP 395 (on finalizing records):
Relax the longstanding restriction whereby an inner class cannot declare a member that is explicitly or implicitly static. This will become legal and, in particular, will allow an inner class to declare a member that is a record class.
Indeed, the following code can be compiled with Java 16 (tried with 16.ea.27):
public class NestingClasses {
public class NestedClass {
static final String CONSTANT = new String(
"DOES NOT COMPILE WITH JAVA <16");
static String constant() {
return CONSTANT;
}
}
}
Actually, you can declare static fields if they are constants and are written in compile time.
class OuterClass {
void foo() {
class Inner{
static final int a = 5; // fine
static final String s = "hello"; // fine
static final Object o = new Object(); // compile error, because cannot be written during compilation
}
}
}
class Initialization sequence is a critical reason.
As inner classes are dependent on the instance of enclosing/Outer class, so Outer class need to be initialized before the initialization of the Inner class.
This is JLS says about class Initialization. The point we need is, class T will be initialize if
A static field declared by T is used and the field is not a constant variable.
So if inner class have an static field accessing that will cause initializing the inner class, but that will not ensure that the enclosing class is initialized.
It would violate some basic rules. you can skip to the last section (to two cases) to avoid noob stuff
One thing about static nested class, when some nested class is static it will behave just like a normal class in every way and it is associated with the Outer class.
But the concept of Inner class/ non-static nested class is it will be associated with the instance of outer/enclosing class. Please note associated with instance not the class.
Now associating with instance clearly means that (from the concept of instance variable) it will exist inside a instance and will be different among instances.
Now, when we make something static we expect it will be initialized when the class is being loaded and should be shared among all instances. But for being non-static, even inner classes themselves (you can definitely forget about instance of inner class for now) are not shared with all instance of the outer/enclosing class (at least conceptually), then how can we expect that some variable of inner class will be shared among all the instance of the inner class.
So if Java allow us to use static variable inside not static nested class. there will be two cases.
If it is shared with all the instance of inner class it will violate the concept of context of instance(instance variable). It's a NO then.
If it is not shared with all instance it will violate the the concept of being static. Again NO.
Here is the motivation that I find best suitable for this "limit":
You can implement the behavior of a static field of an inner class as an instance field of the outer object;
So you do not need static fields/methods.
The behaviour I mean is that all inner class instances of some object share a field(or method).
So, suppose you wanted to count all the inner class instances, you would do:
public class Outer{
int nofInner; //this will count the inner class
//instances of this (Outer)object
//(you know, they "belong" to an object)
static int totalNofInner; //this will count all
//inner class instances of all Outer objects
class Inner {
public Inner(){
nofInner++;
totalNofInner++;
}
}
}
In simple words, non-static inner classes are instance variable for outer class, and they are created only when an outer class is created and an outer class object is created at run-time while static variables are created at class loading time.
So non-static inner class is runtime thing that's why static not the part of a non-static inner class.
NOTE: treat inner classes always like a variable for an outer class they may be static or non-static like any other variables.
Because it would cause ambiguity in the meaning of "static".
Inner classes cannot declare static members other than
compile-time constants. There would be an ambiguity about the meaning
of “static.” Does it mean there is only one instance in the virtual
machine? Or only one instance per outer object? The language designers
decided not to tackle this issue.
Taken from "Core Java SE 9 for the Impatient" by Cay S. Horstmann. Pg 90 Chapter 2.6.3
In the Java language designers' own words:
Since nested classes were first introduced to Java, nested class
declarations that are inner have been prohibited from declaring static
members... It simplifies the language's task of resolving and
validating references to in-scope variables, methods, etc.
There was never any particularly grand conceptual or philosophical reason to prohibit this.
Simplifying things for the language was deemed an insufficient reason to continue to maintain this restriction. Along with the introduction of records in Java 16, they made the decision to relax the restriction.
Class Inner will be initialize if a static field declared by Inner is used and the field is not a constant variable.
class Outer{
class Inner{
static Inner obj = new Inner();
}
public static void main(String[] args){
Inner i = Inner.obj; // It woulds violate the basic rule: without existing Outer class Object there is no chance of existing Inner class Object.
}
}
I guess it's for consistency. While there doesn't seem to be any technical limitation for it, you wouldn't be able to access static members of the internal class from the outside, i.e. OuterClass.InnerClass.i because the middle step is not static.
Alright, I know it's the rule:
According to JLS: 8.1.3 Inner Classes and Enclosing Instances, inner
classes may not declare static initializers or member interfaces.
Inner classes may not declare static members, unless they are
compile-time constant fields.
According to 8.5.2 Static Member Type Declarations, "Member interfaces
are always implicitly static. It is permitted but not required for the
declaration of a member interface to explicitly list the static
modifier". They are always top-level, not inner.
I just wonder why. What may happen if we are allowed to declare interface within an inner class? Won't inner class become top-level class if I put it into another Class file?
Won't inner class become top-level class if I put it into another Class file?
No, it still is an inner class, which the filename indicates (IIRC it's OuterClass$InnerClass.class).
Inner classes have access to the outer class' attributes, i.e. they depend on their outer class' instance. With interfaces you couldn't do this. Think of a completely unrelated class that would have to be created by the corresponding outer class' instance. How would that be done if the outer class doesn't know who implements that interface?
What you can do is declare static interfaces in your outer class, thus merely using the outer as a namespace:
public class OuterClass {
public static interface InnerInterface { //protected and private would be fine too, depending on what makes sense
}
}
Edit: actually, I misread the question and since interfaces are static anyways, here's an updated code snippet:
public class OuterClass {
public static InnerClass { //static inner class making OuterClass just be a namespace
public interface InnerInnerInterface { //protected and private would be fine too, depending on what makes sense
}
}
}
As a workaround you could define an abstract inner inner class, with the drawback that you have to stick to the single inheritance constraint.
Think of it in terms of static vs. non-static context. A "top-level" class establishes a static context because it can be accessed without any enclosing instance. I.e. you can access top-level classes from a main method. The same applies to any static members of a top-level class. An inner class, however, neither exists in* nor establishes any static context. Therefore it can't have any static members, and it can only be accessed via an instance of its containing class, like constructors and other instance members. From a main method, you wouldn't be able to say Outer.Inner.SOME_FIELD because members of an inner class only have meaning with respect to the containing class.
*sort of
By definition a top level class and its inner class(es) are tightly coupled. Interfaces are a means of reducing coupling.
Inner classes are supposed to be implementation details of the top-level class and should therefore be invisible to the client. Any functionality you wish to access of an inner class should be done so through the top-level class, because conceptually speaking, that functionality should be visible only as functionality of the top-level class, so that the class designer can swap out or otherwise drastically change inner classes without breaking clients' builds.
Why can't a java nested Interface be non-static ? And why can't an inner class contain static non final members ?
I came across the questions while going through Gosling and haven't been able to figure out the answer yet.
If an nested class is non-static (i.e. an inner class), this means that each instance of it is bound to an instance of the outer class. As an interface has no instances of its own, it seems to not be useful for the implementing classes to be bound to an outer object, so having it static by default seems reasonable.
I'm not sure why you can't have static non final members in an inner class but since static members aren't bound to any particular object instance it makes no difference whether it is in the inner or outer class.
E.g.
class OuterClass {
private static int staticMember;
class InnerClass {
void incStatic() {
staticMember++;
}
}
}
You can access the static member from the inner class as if it were within the inner class.
All the crazy Java scoping rules are making my head spin and the public static void nonsense isn't helping matters. So far all the programming languages I have used either lexical scoping or some approximation of it without any access modifiers, i.e. inner stuff captures outer stuff and has access to the outer stuff as long as the inner stuff exists.
So how do I make sense of the scoping rules for inner classes in Java? Do they get access to variables declared in the outer class or is there some weird edge cases I have to worry about because of all the public static private stuff floating around?
Static nested classes1 are exactly like external classes except that they have access to all members of the outer class, regardless of access qualifier. They exist apart from any instance of the outer class, so need a reference to an instance in order to access any instance variables or non-static methods of the outer class.
Non-static nested classes (called inner classes) come into existence only in the context of an instance of the outer class. When constructed, they have a second this field automatically generated, which you can access from within the inner class using the syntax Outer.this. Each instance of the inner class is enclosed by a single instance of the outer class. Again, all the access privileges of static nested classes apply to inner classes. But since they already have an instance of the outer class available, they can automatically access instance variables and methods of the outer class.
For a nice (and very detailed) discussion of inner classes and access specifiers, you can read through the Inner Class Specification. It describes, among other things, how a nested class gets access to private members of its outer class(es). A gentler read is the Nested Classes tutorial.
An off-topic aside: Suppose you have this class structure:
public class O {
public O() { ... }
public class I { // an inner class
public I() { ... }
...
}
...
}
and you've created an instance of O:
O outer = new O();
Now suppose you want to create an instance of O.I. you can't just use new O.I() because the new instance of I needs to be enclosed by a specific instance of O. For this, Java provides the following syntax:
O.I inner = outer.new O.I();
Then inner will then have its second this field set to refer to outer.
Note that this "qualified new operator" syntax is only used for inner classes; it would be unnecessary (in fact, an error) if I were a static nested class.
1 You'll often come across the phrase "static inner class" (including, embarrassingly, in an earlier version of this answer). This is incorrect terminology. In Java, "inner classes" are specifically non-static nested classes.
You have to differenciate:
Static inner classes have access to all static members outside their declaration.
Instance inner classes have access to all class members outside their declaration, AND to final fields in the function they are declared in.
Have in mind that a non-static inner class also has a hidden variable with the instance of the outer class, to access the members there. And that all referenced final fields (therefore they must be final) are copied into the inner class in other hidden member variables when the inner class is instantiated.
Example:
public void doStuff(final int a, int b) {
final int c; // Can be referenced
int d; // Cannot be referenced, not final
executer.execute( new Runnable() {
public void run() {
System.out.println("a: "+a+" c: "+c);
}
}
b++; // Not final, not referencable
System.out.println(b);
}
I don't know if it helps, but from the java tutorials:
Static Nested Classes
As with class methods and variables, a static nested class is associated with its outer class. And like static class methods, a static nested class cannot refer directly to instance variables or methods defined in its enclosing class — it can use them only through an object reference.
Note: A static nested class interacts with the instance members of its outer class (and other classes) just like any other top-level class. In effect, a static nested class is behaviorally a top-level class that has been nested in another top-level class for packaging convenience.
Inner Classes [Non-Static Nested class?]
As with instance methods and variables, an inner class is associated with an instance of its enclosing class and has direct access to that object's methods and fields. Also, because an inner class is associated with an instance, it cannot define any static members itself.
You should check the java tutorial on nested classes.
Rules of the Inner classes in Java
In Java it is possible to define a class inside another class such classes are called nested classes or inner class.
There are 3 types of the Inner classes Instance Inner class, static inner class and anonymous inner class
If the Inner class is declared as instance inner class then it can access all of the members of the outer enclosing class including private members
If the Inner class is declared as static then it can only access the static members of the outer class (including the private static members). But it can NOT access the instance members
Consider that there is a variable x is defined in both the outer class and the instance inner classes then general form for accessing the variable from the inner class is this.x for the inner x and OuterClassname.this.x for the outer x.
You can also define an inner class inside any method or any other block
The general form for instantiating the inner class from outside the outer class is
Outer.Inner ob = new Outer.new Inner();
The general form for instantiating the inner class from outside the outer class is (if the inner class is declared as static)
Outer.Inner ob = new Outer.Inner();
The Inner classes can be declared with any of the access modifier keywords
If the Inner class is declared as private then it can NOT be instantiated from outside the outer class. Also in this case you can NOT access the members of the Inner class from outside the outer class even you have an object reference and even if the members of the private inner class are declared as public.
If the Inner class is declared as instance inner class then it can also access the superclass members of the outer class through the general statement
Outer.super.variable; Outer.super.method(params);
Rules for inner class
Outer class accessed by inner class
Inner class can't be accessed by outer class
The inner class members only used the methods and members within the class only access the fulled information
Method Scoped inner classes:-
Can only access the final members of the outer class.