We Keep Coding

How to check if a Java interface has an implementation? [duplicate]

Can I do it with reflection or something like that?

I have been searching for a while and there seems to be different approaches, here is a summary:
reflections library is pretty popular if u don't mind adding the dependency. It would look like this:
Reflections reflections = new Reflections("firstdeveloper.examples.reflections");
Set<Class<? extends Pet>> classes = reflections.getSubTypesOf(Pet.class);
ServiceLoader (as per erickson answer) and it would look like this:
ServiceLoader<Pet> loader = ServiceLoader.load(Pet.class);
for (Pet implClass : loader) {
System.out.println(implClass.getClass().getSimpleName()); // prints Dog, Cat
}
Note that for this to work you need to define Petas a ServiceProviderInterface (SPI) and declare its implementations. you do that by creating a file in resources/META-INF/services with the name examples.reflections.Pet and declare all implementations of Pet in it
examples.reflections.Dog
examples.reflections.Cat
package-level annotation. here is an example:
Package[] packages = Package.getPackages();
for (Package p : packages) {
MyPackageAnnotation annotation = p.getAnnotation(MyPackageAnnotation.class);
if (annotation != null) {
Class<?>[] implementations = annotation.implementationsOfPet();
for (Class<?> impl : implementations) {
System.out.println(impl.getSimpleName());
}
}
}
and the annotation definition:
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
#Target(ElementType.PACKAGE)
public #interface MyPackageAnnotation {
Class<?>[] implementationsOfPet() default {};
}
and you must declare the package-level annotation in a file named package-info.java inside that package. here are sample contents:
#MyPackageAnnotation(implementationsOfPet = {Dog.class, Cat.class})
package examples.reflections;
Note that only packages that are known to the ClassLoader at that time will be loaded by a call to Package.getPackages().
In addition, there are other approaches based on URLClassLoader that will always be limited to classes that have been already loaded, Unless you do a directory-based search.

What erickson said, but if you still want to do it then take a look at Reflections. From their page:
Using Reflections you can query your metadata for:
get all subtypes of some type
get all types annotated with some annotation
get all types annotated with some annotation, including annotation parameters matching
get all methods annotated with some

In general, it's expensive to do this. To use reflection, the class has to be loaded. If you want to load every class available on the classpath, that will take time and memory, and isn't recommended.
If you want to avoid this, you'd need to implement your own class file parser that operated more efficiently, instead of reflection. A byte code engineering library may help with this approach.
The Service Provider mechanism is the conventional means to enumerate implementations of a pluggable service, and has become more established with the introduction of Project Jigsaw (modules) in Java 9. Use the ServiceLoader in Java 6, or implement your own in earlier versions. I provided an example in another answer.

Spring has a pretty simple way to acheive this:
public interface ITask {
void doStuff();
}
#Component
public class MyTask implements ITask {
public void doStuff(){}
}
Then you can autowire a list of type ITask and Spring will populate it with all implementations:
#Service
public class TaskService {
#Autowired
private List<ITask> tasks;
}

The most robust mechanism for listing all classes that implement a given interface is currently ClassGraph, because it handles the widest possible array of classpath specification mechanisms, including the new JPMS module system. (I am the author.)
try (ScanResult scanResult = new ClassGraph().whitelistPackages("x.y.z")
.enableClassInfo().scan()) {
for (ClassInfo ci : scanResult.getClassesImplementing("x.y.z.SomeInterface")) {
foundImplementingClass(ci); // Do something with the ClassInfo object
}
}

With ClassGraph it's pretty simple:
Groovy code to find implementations of my.package.MyInterface:
#Grab('io.github.classgraph:classgraph:4.6.18')
import io.github.classgraph.*
new ClassGraph().enableClassInfo().scan().withCloseable { scanResult ->
scanResult.getClassesImplementing('my.package.MyInterface').findAll{!it.abstract}*.name
}

What erikson said is best. Here's a related question and answer thread - http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t137693-find-all-implementing-classes-in-classpath.html
The Apache BCEL library allows you to read classes without loading them. I believe it will be faster because you should be able to skip the verification step. The other problem with loading all classes using the classloader is that you will suffer a huge memory impact as well as inadvertently run any static code blocks which you probably do not want to do.
The Apache BCEL library link - http://jakarta.apache.org/bcel/

Yes, the first step is to identify "all" the classes that you cared about. If you already have this information, you can enumerate through each of them and use instanceof to validate the relationship. A related article is here: https://web.archive.org/web/20100226233915/www.javaworld.com/javaworld/javatips/jw-javatip113.html

Also, if you are writing an IDE plugin (where what you are trying to do is relatively common), then the IDE typically offers you more efficient ways to access the class hierarchy of the current state of the user code.

I ran into the same issue. My solution was to use reflection to examine all of the methods in an ObjectFactory class, eliminating those that were not createXXX() methods returning an instance of one of my bound POJOs. Each class so discovered is added to a Class[] array, which was then passed to the JAXBContext instantiation call. This performs well, needing only to load the ObjectFactory class, which was about to be needed anyway. I only need to maintain the ObjectFactory class, a task either performed by hand (in my case, because I started with POJOs and used schemagen), or can be generated as needed by xjc. Either way, it is performant, simple, and effective.

A new version of #kaybee99's answer, but now returning what the user asks: the implementations...
Spring has a pretty simple way to acheive this:
public interface ITask {
void doStuff();
default ITask getImplementation() {
return this;
}
}
#Component
public class MyTask implements ITask {
public void doStuff(){}
}
Then you can autowire a list of type ITask and Spring will populate it with all implementations:
#Service
public class TaskService {
#Autowired(required = false)
private List<ITask> tasks;
if ( tasks != null)
for (ITask<?> taskImpl: tasks) {
taskImpl.doStuff();
}
}

How to process annotations with #Target(ElementType.TYPE_USE)?

I'm implementing an annotation processor to make sure that the elements marked with an annotation are instances of a class that implements a certain interface, or are uses of types that implement a certain interface:
#Documented
#Target(value = { ElementType.PARAMETER, ElementType.TYPE_USE })
#Retention(value = RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
public #interface AuditSubject {
}
public interface Auditable {
// methods that provide data for writing a log entry...
}
public class Report implements Auditable {
}
For the annotated elements, a log entry must be created after method execution (using AOP). Examples:
#CreateLogEntry
public Result persist(#AuditSubject Report newReport) {
// A log entry must be created based on the incoming 'newReport' instance.
}
#CreateLogEntry
public UpdateResult<#AuditSubject Report> update(Report update) {
// A log entry must be created based on the updated report, which is not the same instance as 'update' but an equivalent one.
}
#CreateLogEntry
public Result persistBatch(List<#AuditSubject Report> batch) {
// A log entry must be created for each element in 'batch' after this method's execution.
}
The log entries must be created provided that Report implements Auditable; if it does not, a runtime exception is thrown (Yikes, I forgot to implement the interface!). Thus the annotation processor helps to catch programmer mistakes at compile time. So far I've been successful in checking all uses in parameters, but not in type uses. The relevant code from the annotation processor is as follows:
#Override
public boolean process(Set<? extends TypeElement> annotations, RoundEnvironment roundEnv) {
for (Element annotated : roundEnv.getElementsAnnotatedWith(AuditSubject.class)) {
// Only prints elements with ElementKind.PARAMETER)!
this.messager.printMessage(Kind.NOTE, TextUtils.replaceParams("annotated: {} ; Kind : {} ; enclosing : {}", annotated, annotated.getKind(), annotated.getEnclosingElement()));
if (annotated.getKind() == ElementKind.PARAMETER) {
// Code here works as expected, raises errors for annotated parameters of classes that don't implement Auditable.
} else if (annotated.getKind() == ElementKind.WHAT_TO_USE) {
// What ElementKind do I need to use here?
}
}
return false;
}
Only annotated elements with kind ElementKind.PARAMETER are recognized (the first line in the loop of process() only prints a single line for 'newReport') How can I check that the annotated types implement Auditable? There's no "ElementKind.TYPE_USE" constant to use. I haven't been able to find any relevant information on this matter. Thanks for your attention.

The Java annotation processing API was designed when Java only supported annotations on declarations. The API only supports visiting declarations, such as fields, methods, and method parameters. It does not visit local variable declarations, nor other annotations within a method body, nor type annotations.
If you wish to process type annotations or annotations within method bodies, you will need to write your own code to recurse on types or to recurse examining the lines of code within a method.
An alternative to this is to use a tool like the Checker Framework. It implements its own visitors, and therefore an annotation processor built on it is invoked for every occurrence of a type annotation.

Why not use TYPE_PARAMETER?
javax.annotation.processing.Processor API document there is:
An annotation type is considered present if there is at least one annotation of that type present on an element enclosed within the root elements of a round. For this purpose, a type parameter is considered to be enclosed by its generic element. Annotations on type uses, as opposed to annotations on elements, are ignored when computing whether or not an annotation type is present.
javax.lang.model.element.TypeParameterElement
Element getGenericElement()
Returns the generic class, interface, method, or constructor that is parameterized by this type parameter.

Java annotations: pass value of annotation attribute to another annotation

I have interface Resource and several classes implementing it, for example Audio, Video... Further, I have created custom annotation MyAnnotation with Class type param:
#MyAnnotation(type = Audio.class)
class Audio {
...
}
#MyAnnotation(type = Video.class)
class Video{
...
}
In some other place in code I have to use Interface Resource as a returned type:
public class Operations<T extends Resource> {
....
#OtherAnnotation(type = Audio.class (if audio), type = Video.class (if video) )
T getResource();
....
}
The question is how to appropriatelly annotate annotation #OtherAnnotation depending of what kind of Resource type will be returned ?

What you are asking is for dynamic values for annotation attributes.
However annotations can only be set at compile time which is the reason why their values can only be compile time constants. You may only read them at runtime.
There was a similar question in which someone tried to generate the annotation value , it's answer explains why there is no way to dynamically generate a value used in annotation in a bit more detail. In that question there was an attempt to use a final class variable generated with a static method.
There are annotation processors which offer a bit more flexibility by handling placeholders. However i don't think this fits your case, as you want the dynamic values at runtime.
This answer refers to spring's use of the expression language for the Value annotation in which the placeholder (#Value("#{systemProperties.dbName})") gets overrided with the data from one of the property sources defined ( example in spring boot )
In any case, you will have to rethink your architecture a bit.

Modify a method using Annotations

How can I change what a method is doing in Java ?
I mean, I am trying to use annotations to make the following code
#Anno1(Argument = "Option1")
public class TestClass
{
#Anno2
public void test()
{
}
}
Into
public class TestClass
{
private static StaticReference z;
public void test()
{
z.invokeToAll();
}
}
This is a very simplified example of what I am trying to do. Anno1 will have many possible combinations, but this is not my problem so far. My problem is how to add code to method test()
I am looking for a more generic solution if possible. Eg. A way to add every kind of code in the method (not just a way to .invokeToAll())
So far I am using import javax.annotation.processing.*; and I have the following code, but I don't know how to go on from there
private void processMethodAnnotations(RoundEnvironment env)
{
for (Element e : env.getElementsAnnotatedWith(Anno2.class))
{
//If it is a valid annotation over a method
if (e.getKind() == ElementKind.METHOD)
{
//What to do here :S
}else
{
processingEnv.getMessager().printMessage(Diagnostic.Kind.WARNING,"Not a method!", e);
}
}
}
I have found something about Java Reflection but I have not found any source to help me with what I am doing.
Obviously I extends AbstractProcessor in my code
I have found this tutorial (http://www.zdnetasia.com/writing-and-processing-custom-annotations-part-3-39362483.htm) But this concerns creating a new class, not just changing a method. and the javax.lang.model.elements do not provide any way of editing that element (which in my case represents a Method).
I hope my question is clear and inline with the rules. If not please comment and I will clarify. Thanks.

Annotation processing is the wrong way to go for you, from Wikipedia:
When Java source code is compiled,
annotations can be processed by
compiler plug-ins called annotation
processors. Processors can produce
informational messages or create
additional Java source files or
resources, which in turn may be
compiled and processed, but annotation
processors cannot modify the annotated
code itself.
People suggested to you the right way - AOP. Specifically, you can use AspectJ. "Quick result" way is (if you use Eclipse):
Install AJDT (AspectJ Development Tools)
Create an AspectJ project and add there your classes and annotations
Create Aspect:
public aspect Processor {
private StaticReference z;
pointcut generic()
// intercept execution of method named test, annotated with #Anno1
// from any class type, annotated with #Anno2
: execution(#Anno2 * (#Anno1 *).test())
// method takes no arguments
&& args ();
// here you have written what you want the method to actually do
void around () : generic() {
z.invokeToAll();
}
}
now you can execute a test and you will see that it works ;) AJDT compiles code for you automatically, so do not need any manual work to do, hope that's what you called "magic" ;)
UPDATE:
if your code in the test() method depends on the Anno1 annotation value, then inside aspect you can get class annotation for which it is executed this way:
void around () : generic() {
Annotation[] classAnnotations = thisJoinPoint.getThis().getClass().getAnnotations();
String ArgumentValue = null;
for ( Annotation annotation : classAnnotations ) {
if ( annotation instanceof Anno1 ) {
ArgumentValue = ((Anno1) annotation).Argument();
break;
}
}
if ( ArgumentValue != null && ArgumentValue.equals("Option1")) {
z.invokeToAll();
}
}
where thisJoinPoint is a special reference variable.
UPDATE2:
if you want to add System.out.println( this ) in your aspect, you need to write there System.out.println( thisJoinPoint.getThis() ), just tested and it works. thisJoinPoint.getThis() returns you "this" but not exactly; in fact this is Object variable and if you want to get any propery you need either to cast or to use reflection. And thisJoinPoint.getThis() does not provide access to private properties.
Well, now seems that your question is answered, but if I missed anything, or you get additional question/problems with this way - feel free to ask ;)

It's perfectly possible to do what you ask, although there is a caveat: relying on private compiler APIs. Sounds scary, but it isn't really (compiler implementations tend to be stable).
There's a paper that explains the procedure: The Hacker's Guide to Javac.
Notably, this is used by Project Lombok to provide automatic getter/setter generation (amongst other things). The following article explains how it does it, basically re-iterating what is said the aforementioned paper.

Well, you might see if the following boilerplate code will be useful:
public void magic(Object bean, String[] args) throws Exception {
for (Method method : bean.getClass().getDeclaredMethods()) {
if (method.isAnnotationPresent(Anno2.class)) {
// Invoke the original method
method.invoke(bean, args);
// Invoke your 'z' method
StaticReference.invokeAll();
}
}
}
As an alternative your might employ aspect oriented programming, for instance you have the AspectJ project.

I'm not sure at all if it is even possible to change the source or byte code via annotations. From what your describing it looks as if aspect oriented programming could provide a solution to your problem.
Your annotations are pretty similiar to the pointcut concept (they mark a location where code needs to be inserted) and the inserted code is close the advice concept.
Another approach would be parsing the java source file into an abstract syntax tree, modify this AST and serialize to a java compiler input.

If your class extends a suitable interface, you could wrap it in a DynamicProxy, which delegates all calls to the original methods, except the call to test.

How to make Spring accept fluent (non-void) setters?

I have an API which I am turning into an internal DSL. As such, most methods in my PoJos return a reference to this so that I can chain methods together declaratively as such (syntactic sugar).
myComponent
.setID("MyId")
.setProperty("One")
.setProperty2("Two")
.setAssociation(anotherComponent)
.execute();
My API does not depend on Spring but I wish to make it 'Spring-Friendly' by being PoJo friendly with zero argument constructors, getters and setters. The problem is that Spring seems to not detect my setter methods when I have a non-void return type.
The return type of this is very convenient when chaining together my commands so I don't want to destroy my programmatic API just be to compatible with Spring injection.
Is there a setting in Spring to allow me to use non-void setters?
Chris

Thanks to all (and especially Espen who went to a lot of effort to show me the various options within Spring).
In the end, I found a solution myself that doesn't require Spring configuration.
I followed the link from Stephen C then found a reference to the SimpleBeanInfo class within that set of Threads. This class allows a user to write their own bean method resolution code by placing another class in the same package as the class with the non-standard setters/getters to override the logic of with 'BeanInfo' appended onto the classname and implementing the 'BeanInfo' interface.
I then did a search on Google and found this blog which pointed the way. The solution on the blog was quite basic so I padded it out for my purposes.
Per Class (with fluent setters)
public class MyComponentBeanInfo<T> extends SimpleBeanInfo {
private final static Class<?> _clazz = MyComponent.class;
PropertyDescriptor[] _properties = null;
public synchronized PropertyDescriptor[] getPropertyDescriptors() {
if (_properties == null) {
_properties = Helpers.getPropertyDescriptionsIncludingFluentSetters(_clazz);
}
return _properties;
}
public BeanDescriptor getBeanDescriptor() {
return new BeanDescriptor(_clazz);
}
}
PropertyDescriptor generation method
public static PropertyDescriptor[] getPropertyDescriptionsIncludingFluentSetters( Class<?> clazz) {
Map<String,Method> getterMethodMap = new HashMap<String,Method>();
Map<String,Method> setterMethodMap = new HashMap<String,Method>();
Set<String> allProperties = new HashSet<String>();
PropertyDescriptor[] properties = null;
try {
Method[] methods = clazz.getMethods();
for (Method m : methods) {
String name = m.getName();
boolean isSetter = m.getParameterTypes().length == 1 && name.length() > 3 && name.substring(0,3).equals("set") && name.charAt(3) >= 'A' && name.charAt(3) <= 'Z';
boolean isGetter = (!isSetter) && m.getParameterTypes().length == 0 && name.length() > 3 && name.substring(0,3).equals("get") && name.charAt(3) >= 'A' && name.charAt(3) <= 'Z';
if (isSetter || isGetter) {
name = name.substring(3);
name = name.length() > 1
? name.substring(0,1).toLowerCase() + name.substring(1)
: name.toLowerCase();
if (isSetter) {
setterMethodMap.put(name, m);
} else {
getterMethodMap.put(name, m);
}
allProperties.add(name);
}
}
properties = new PropertyDescriptor[allProperties.size()];
Iterator<String> iterator = allProperties.iterator();
for (int i=0; i < allProperties.size(); i++) {
String propertyName = iterator.next();
Method readMethod = getterMethodMap.get(propertyName);
Method writeMethod = setterMethodMap.get(propertyName);
properties[i] = new PropertyDescriptor(propertyName, readMethod, writeMethod);
}
} catch (IntrospectionException e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e.toString(), e);
}
return properties;
}
Advantages to this approach:
No custom spring configuration (Spring is not aware of the non-standard setters and sees them as normal). No dependancy on any Spring .jar files but accessible from Spring.
Just seems to work.
Disadvantages to this approach:
I have to place create a BeanInfo class for all of my API classes with non-standard setters. Luckily there are only around 10 such classes and by moving the method resolution logic into a seperate class I only have one place to maintain.
Closing Thoughts
In my opinion, Spring should deal with fluent setters natively, they don't hurt anyone and it should just ignore the return value.
By requiring that setters be rigidly void, it has forced me to write a lot more boiler plate code than I would have needed otherwise. I appreciate the Bean Specification, but bean resolution is trivial using reflection without even using the standard bean resolver so Spring should offer the option of its own bean resolver that will handle this situations.
By all means, leave the standard mechanism as the default, but offer a one-line configuration option. I look forward to future versions where this might be optionally relaxed.

Is there a setting in Spring to allow me to use non-void setters?
The simple answer is No - there is no such setting.
Spring is designed to be compatible with the JavaBeans spec, and that requires the setters to return void.
For a discussion, refer to this Spring Forums thread. There are possible ways around this limitation mentioned in the forum, but there is no simple solution, and I don't think anyone actually reported that they had tried this and that it worked.

Spring can also be configured with Java configuration.
An example:
#Configuration
public class Config {
#Bean
public MyComponent myComponent() {
return MyComponent
.setID(id)
.setProperty("One", "1")
.setProperty("Two", "2")
.setAssociation(anotherConfig.anotherComponent())
.execute();
}
#Autowired
private AnotherConfig anotherConfig;
#Value("${id}")
private String id;
}
You have a nice immutable object. You have actually implemented the Builder pattern!
Updated to respond to Chris's comment:
I guess it's not exactly what you want, but using properties files solves some issues. See the id field in the example above.
Else, you can use Spring's FactoryBean pattern:
public class MyComponentFactory implements FactoryBean<MyComponent> {
private MyComponent myComponent;
public MyComponentFactory(String id, Property propertyOne, ..) {
myComponent = MyComponent
.setID(id)
.setProperty("One", "1")
.set(..)
.execute();
}
public MyComponent getObject() throws Exception {
return myComponent;
}
public Class<MyComponent> getObjectType() {
return MyComponent.class;
}
public boolean isSingleton() {
return false;
}
}
With the FactoryBean, you shield the configuration from the object returned from the getObject() method.
In the XML configuration, you configure the FactoryBean implementation. In this case with <constructor-arg /> elements.

One simple suggestion, it is customary not to use setters, but the properties names themselves. So have a setter, and have another method for the builder:
component.id("MyId")
.property("One")
.property2("Two")
.association(anotherComponent)
.execute();

As far as I know, there is no simple switch. Spring uses the Beans convention, and expects a void setter. Spring works with beans at the property level via an instance of the BeanWrapper interface. The default implementation, BeanWrapperImpl, uses introspection, but you could create your own modified version that uses reflection to find methods matching your pattern.
EDIT: Looking at the Spring code, BeanWrapperImpl is hard-wired into the bean factories, there is no simple way to replace this with another implementation. However, as spring uses introspection, we can work on getting java.beans.Introspector to produce the results we want. Here are the alternatives in order of decreasing pain:
change the method signature on your setters to comply.
implement your own BeanInfo classes for each of your beans
Use reflection to plug dynamically generated BeanInfo classes into the introspector.
The first two options are probably not really options for you, as they involve quite a lot of changes. Exploring the third option in more detail:
To know which beans are being instantiated by spring, implement your own BeanFactoryPostProcessor. This gets to see all the bean definitions before they are used by the BeanFactory. Your implementation iterates over all the BeanDefinitions in the factor, and fetches the bean class from each definition. Now you know all the classes that are being used.
With a list of classes, you can set about creating your own BeanInfos for these classes. You use the Introspector to generate the default BeanInfo for each class, which would give you read-only properties for your properties with return value setters. You then create a new BeanInfo, based on the original, but with PropertyDescriptors referencing setter methods - your return value setters.
With new beanInfos generated for each class, you need to make sure that the Introspector returns these when asked for the beaninfo for your class. The introspector has a private Map that is used to cache beanInfos. You can get hold of this via reflection, enable access - setAccessible(true) - and add your BeanInfo instances to it - map.put(Class,BeanInfo).
When spring asks the Introspector for the BeanInfo for your bean class, the introspector returns your modified beanInfo, complete with setter methods mapped to your setters with return values.

As others have said, it's not just Spring-friendliness you risk losing. A non-void setter isn't really a setter as far as JavaBeans are concerned, and all sorts of other tools (validators, marshallers, viewers, persisters, whatever else you can dream up) will probably use Introspector and BeanInfo, which expect setters to be null.
With this in mind, how flexible is the requirement that they be called setX? A lot of fluent interfaces in Java use withX instead. If you're using Eclipse, you can probably create a code generation template to make X getX(), void setX(X x), and X withX(X x) for you. If you're using some other codegen tool, I can imagine adding withX fluent setter/getter methods would also be easy.
The with word seems a bit odd, but when you see it alongside a constructor it reads really well.
Request r = new Request().withEndpoint("example.com")
.withPort(80)
.withSSL(false)
.withFoo("My Foo");
service.send(r);
One such API is the AWS SDK for Java, which you can consult for examples. An off-topic caveat is that boolean getters may be called isX, but Boolean getters must be called getX.