Are object immutable? - java

I have to decide whether the following two objects are immutable. I looked up the definition stating: “An object is considered immutable if its state cannot change after it is constructed”.
public class Car {
private int spareTires = 1;
private String model = "Volkswagen";
private Person driver = new Person();
public double engineSize = 2.0;
public int getSpareTires() { return spareTires; }
public String getModel() { return model; }
public Person getDriver() { return driver; }
}
public class Person {
private String name = "James";
public void setName(String s) { name = s; }
public String getName() { return name; }
}
Person isn't immutable since it has a mutator method (setName()).
However, I'm not sure about Car. Car doesn't have any mutator methods but according to https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/concurrency/imstrat.html the fields must be declared final and static which isn't the case. Also I believe it's possible to change the state through public double engineSize = 2.0;?

However, I’m not sure about car. Car doesn’t have any mutator methods
but according to
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/concurrency/imstrat.html
the fields must be declared final and static which isn’t the case.
Not necessarily static, final is enough.
Also I believe it’s possible to change the state through ” public
double engineSize = 2.0; ” ?
Indeed, to be immutable, you don't have to expose as public the fields which describe the state of an instance. Otherwise, any client class of the instance may change engineSize.
Besides, this getter in the Car class does the Person modifiable since Person is not immutable :
public Person getDriver() { return driver; }

Car is not immutable since it has the driver property which is mutable and exposes the public engineSize method which is mutable. Also none of both classes is final.

Related

Cast an Object to its superclass in Java

Learning Java here and I try to cast on a super class and i cant access to subclass methods, is it possible, I am doing something wrong.
I have this:
public class Musician {
public String name;
public String surname;
}
public class Instrumentist extends Musician{
public String getInstrumento() {
return instrumento;
}
public void setInstrumento(String instrumento) {
this.instrumento = instrumento;
}
private String instrumento;
public Instrumentist(String nombre, String name, String surname){
this.name = nombre;
this.surname = surname;
}
}
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Musician m = new Instrumentist("Antonio", "Vivaldi", "none");
System.out.println(m);
}
}
I know I can do Instrumentist i = new Instrumentist("Antonio", "Vivaldi", "none")
but then what is the purpose of Cast to superclass?
The concept is like this:
The superclass/interface provides general implementation or a contract. The subclass overrides/implements that contract.
To make sure that you can assign different implementations of that contract at runtime, you use reference of a Superclass and assign object of a subclass to it.
Musician m = new Instrumentist("Antonio", "Vivaldi", "none");
Here, with m, you can call methods defined in Musician class, but if your subclass has any other methods apart from those defined superclass, you can not access them using m. If subclass overrides any method, then even after using reference of superclass, say m, java would make sure that at runtime, overridden method in subclass is called.

private static field Java

I was asked the following question:
Assuming all instance fields and all instance methods of class A in Java are private, which of the following are correct:
A is immutable
A is not for sure immutable because it could be that it extends a not-immutable class
A is not for sure immutable because you might be able to change its fields from static methods
I thought the correct answer was 1 but turns out 2 and 3 are both correct and 1 is not.
How come if everything is private you can still modify the fields?
Why if it extends a not immutable class, but still have everything private, it might be now immutable?
What does it mean to change its fields from static methods?
A could extend a class with fields that are public, in which case, those fields can be modified despite A itself not defining any mutable fields, as it will inherit fields and instance methods from its parent class.
Consider the following code:
class Child extends Parent {
private String name;
}
class Parent {
public int id;
}
class TestChild {
public static void main(final String[] args) {
final Child child = new Child();
//String s = child.name;<--The field Child.name is not visible
System.out.println("Previous id: " + child.id);
child.id = 100;//<--We can modify this because it is defined as public in Parent
System.out.println("Updated id: " + child.id);
}
}
The output will be:
Previous id: 0
Updated id: 100
For the next case, it seems that the question meant methods as in instance methods, not specifying whether or not there are static methods. Static methods that are public can be called anywhere and create side effects by modifying static fields and can also access private instance fields on instances of A, which makes A not immutable.
Point 2:
class B {
public int bValue;
}
class A extends B {
private int aValue;
}
An instance of A is not immutable because it has inherited a bValue field that can be changed.
Point 3:
class A {
private int x;
public static void mutate(A a) {
a.x += 1;
}
}
Instances of A can be mutated by calling the static method A.mutate, which has full access to A's private fields. The stipulation as it now reads, "all instance methods of class A in Java are private", does not apply to static methods.
All the previous answers were right. On the question regarding
A is not for sure immutable because you might be able to change its fields from static methods
can be achieved like
public class Test {
public static void main(String[] args) {
A a = new A(10);
System.out.println(a);
A.mutateObj(20);
System.out.println(a);
}
}
class A {
private static A a;
private int x;
A(int x) {
this.a = this;
this.x = x;
}
public static void mutateObj(int b) {
a.x = b;
}
#Override
public String toString() {
return "A{" +
"x=" + x +
'}';
}
}
Result =>
A{x=10}
A{x=20}

accessing fields of a class in Java

I am completely new to Java.
I was practicing a code about a person eating some fruit. I have 3 classes
Fruit Class:
public class Fruit {
String fruitname = "grapes";
}
Person Class:
public class Person {
void eat(Fruit f) {
System.out.println("person is eating " + f.fruitname); // how can I do f.fruitname
}
}
Test Class:
public class TestFruit {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Person p = new Person(); // person object
Fruit f = new Fruit(); // fruit object
p.eat(f);
} // eat method of person class
}
output:
person is eating grapes
For accessing fields of a class, Object of that class is created.
My question is:
In Person class, how can I access fruitname field of Fruit class (i.e., writing f.fruitname) without instantiating Fruit class in Person class?
fruitname is a data member of Fruit class and instance member don't exist until object is created.
I have just started learning Java, and I am stuck here. Please help me to understand.
What you're doing does not work because you're not declaring the member field as public:
public String fruitname = "grapes";
Only then you can even compile this:
System.out.println("person is eating " + f.fruitname);
Note that in Java fields are package private per default (see also). This means that the field can be private but in this case you can only access this field in classes which reside in the same package.
However, in general one creates getter and setter methods like this:
public class Fruit {
private String fruitname = "grapes";
public String getFruitname() {
return fruitname;
}
public void setFruitname(String fruitname) {
this.fruitname = fruitname;
}
}
which will allow you to access the class member fruitname like this:
public class Person {
public void eat(Fruit f) {
System.out.println("person is eating " + f.getFruitname());
}
}
Depending on your IDE you might be able to right click the field (or somewhere in the class) and find something like Generate.. > Getters & Setters which makes the whole act less annoying.
Your problem is, that you dont encapsulate the Fruit class correctly.
The current field is package-private so only the class itself and other classes from the same package can access the field. When starting to use concurrency you really need to encapsulate your fields right in order to guard them aswell.
I suggest looking into the Annotation-Preprocessor Lombok since it will help you a lot by generating methods later on. You would just need to add two annotations above your class or the fields in it that should be encapsulated.
An encapsulated and documented version of your Fruit class would look like this:
package me.yourname.yourproject;
import javax.annotation.Nullable;
public class Fruit {
#Nullable
private String name;
/**
* Constructs a fruit without a name.
*/
public Fruit(){
}
/**
* Constructs a fruit with an initial name.
*
* #param name The fruits initial name.
*/
public Fruit(String name){
this.name = name;
}
/**
* Sets the name of the fruit.
*
* #param name The fruits new name.
*/
public void setName(#Nullable String name){
this.name = name;
}
/**
* Gets the fruits current name.
*/
#Nullable
public String getName(){
return this.name;
}
}
So it looks like you need to read up on Creating an object in Java. That's not a bad thing! OO design is hard when you're a beginner.
To answer you're question, you have to instantiate the fruitname object, and then mark it public (or preferably write a getter/setter)
public class Fruit {
private string name;
public Fruit(String name) {
this.name=name;
}
public String getName() {
return this.name;
}
}
Create this object with something like:
Fruit f=new Fruit("peach");
System.out.println(f.getName());
If what you want is to access it in Person without having an instance of Fruit:
Your fruitname is an instance variable. By declaring it 'static' you make it a class member and then you can access it using Fruit.fruitname
You can make it 'public' to allow access from anywhere. As in
public static string fruitname = "grapes";
Now you don't need an instance of Fruit to access fruitname.
Your Person call can look as follows:
public class Person {
void eat() {
System.out.println("person is eating " + Fruit.fruitname);
}
}

Is it possible to use getters/setters of extended class in Java

I have the following
public abstract class MyData
{
private String sID;
public void setsID(String sID) {
this.sID= sID;
}
public String getsID() {
return sID;
}
}
This base class is being extended by 2 other classes
public class DataTypeOne extends MyData
{
private String sName;
public void setsName(String sName) {
this.sName= sName;
}
public String getsName() {
return sName;
}
}
public class DataTypeTwo extends MyData
{
private String sSummary;
public void setsSummary(String sSummary) {
this.sSummary= sSummary;
}
public String getsSummary() {
return sSummary;
}
}
I am initializing this class as follows
MyData oDataOne = new DataTypeOne();
MyData oDataTwo = new DataTypeTwo();
Reason for that is that I have a factory method which shall give me the class based on type (One or two)
With oDataOne & oDataTwo, I am able to access getsID() from the base class but not the getters & setters of the respective class.
How can I access those? I
You can't access a method that doesn't exist. All you've promised your Java compiler is that oDataOne and oDataTwo are MyData objects. Since the MyData class doesn't have the implementation-specific methods, you cannot ask Java to call those methods (since it doesn't think they exist).
If you want to access those methods, you need to either cast the object to a class that actually has the right methods, or you can add abstract method stubs to your base class, which will tell Java that those methods actually exist.
Type casting is simpler to write in the short term, but less clear, and you may run into more trouble down the road:
((DataTypeOne) oDataOne).getsName();
((DataTypeTwo) oDataOne).getsSummary(); // Throws ClassCastException!
Adding abstract stubs is more robust, but may not make sense if not all concrete subclasses should implement all abstract methods:
public abstract class MyData {
public abstract void setsName(String name);
public abstract String getsName();
public abstract void setsSummary(String summary);
public abstract String getsSummary();
}
public class DataTypeOne extends MyData {
public String getsName() {
// implement
}
public void setsName(String name) {
// implement
}
// Still have to implement these!!!
public String getsSummary() {
// raise an exception or something if appropriate
}
public void setsSummary(String summary) {
// raise an exception or something if appropriate
}
}
// Same for DataTypeTwo
Since you declared the variable as a MyData, you can only access the methods of MyData. You can get to the subclass methods by casting it to DataTypeOne or DataTypeTwo:
((DataTypeOne)oDataOne).getsName()
But you need to be sure it is of type DataTypeOne or you will get a ClassCastException
MyData oDataOne = new DataTypeOne();
this says, that your oDataOne object is of the type MyData. Even if it is created as a DataTypeOne, java can only be sure that it is defiantly a MyData instance.
If you are sure that the MyData instance is in reality also a DataTypeOne instance, you can cast and then access the DataTypeOne methods + the MyData methods.
To make sure that an object is of a specific type test:
if(oDataOne instanceOf DataTypeOne){
((DataTypeOne) oDataOne).getsName(); // this will return the Name if oDataOne is really of the type DataTypeOne
}
An object of type MyData has no knowledge of whether any other classes extends it or not, so there is no way to access members of those classes.
You will have to cast your object to the specific type to access the specific members.
If you find yourself in this situation, you can be pretty sure that your design is flawed. If you need to perform a specific action for each type of MyData extension, add a method, e.g specialAction() to the interface and hide the specifics in there. That eliminates the entire need to find out which subclass you are dealing with.

How to access the private variables of a class in its subclass?

This is a question I was asked in an interview: I have class A with private members and Class B extends A. I know private members of a class cannot be accessed, but the question is: I need to access private members of class A from class B, rather than create variables with the same value in class B.
The interviewer was either testing your knowledge of access modifiers, or your approach to changing existing classes, or both.
I would have listed them (public, private, protected, package private) with an explanation of each. Then gone on to say that class A would need to be modified to allow access to those members from class B, either by adding setters and getters, or by changing the access modifiers of the members. Or class B could use reflection. Finally, talk about the pros and cons of each approach.
Reflection? Omitting imports, this should work:
public class A {
private int ii = 23;
}
public class B extends A {
private void readPrivateSuperClassField() throws Exception {
Class<?> clazz = getClass().getSuperclass();
Field field = clazz.getDeclaredField("ii");
field.setAccessible(true);
System.out.println(field.getInt(this));
}
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
new B().readPrivateSuperClassField();
}
}
It'll not work if you do something like that before the of invocation readPrivateSuperClassField();:
System.setSecurityManager(new SecurityManager() {
#Override
public void checkMemberAccess(Class<?> clazz, int which) {
if (clazz.equals(A.class)) {
throw new SecurityException();
} else {
super.checkMemberAccess(clazz, which);
}
}
});
And there are other conditions under which the Reflection approach won't work. See the API docs for SecurityManager and AccessibleObject for more info. Thanks to CPerkins for pointing that out.
I hope they were just testing your knowledge, not looking for a real application of this stuff ;-) Although I think an ugly hack like this above can be legit in certain edge cases.
The architecture is broken. Private members are private because you do not want them accessed outside the class and friends.
You can use friend hacks, accessors, promote the member, or #define private public (heh). But these are all short term solutions - you will probably have to revisit the broken architecture at some stage.
By using public accessors (getters & setters) of A's privates members ...
You cannot access private members from the parent class. You have make it protected or have protected/public method that has access to them.
EDIT : It is true you can use reflection. But that is not usual and not good idea to break encapsulation.
A nested class can access to all the private members of its enclosing class—both fields and methods. Therefore, a public or protected nested class inherited by a subclass has indirect access to all of the private members of the superclass.
public class SuperClass
{
private int a = 10;
public void makeInner()
{
SubClass in = new SubClass();
in.inner();
}
class SubClass
{
public void inner()
{
System.out.println("Super a is " + a);
}
}
public static void main(String[] args)
{
SuperClass.SubClass s = new SuperClass().new SubClass();
s.inner();
}
}
If I'm understanding the question correctly, you could change private to protected. Protected variables are accessible to subclasses but behave like private variables otherwise.
By using setters and getters u can access it
From JLS §8.3. Field Declarations:
A private field of a superclass might be accessible to a subclass - for example, if both classes are members of the same class. Nevertheless, a private field is never inherited by a subclass.
I write the example code:
public class Outer
{
class InnerA
{
private String text;
}
class InnerB extends InnerA
{
public void setText(String text)
{
InnerA innerA = this;
innerA.text = text;
}
public String getText()
{
return ((InnerA) this).text;
}
}
public static void main(String[] args)
{
final InnerB innerB = new Outer().new InnerB();
innerB.setText("hello world");
System.out.println(innerB.getText());
}
}
The explanation of the accessibility of InnerA.text is here JLS §6.6.1. Determining Accessibility:
Otherwise, the member or constructor is declared private, and access is permitted if and only if it occurs within the body of the top level class (§7.6) that encloses the declaration of the member or constructor.
You can use the setters and getters of class A. Which gives same feeling as if You are using a class A's object.
Have you thought about making them protected ? Just to be sure you are aware of this option, if you are then pardon me for bringing up this trivia ;)
Private members cant be accessed in derived class
If you want to access means you can use getter and setter methods.
class A
{
private int a;
void setA(int a)
{
this.a=a;
}
int getA()
{
return a;
}
}
Class B extends A
{
public static void main(String[] arg)
{
B obj= new B();
obj.setA(10);
System.out.println("The value of A is:"+obj.getA());
}
}
Private will be hidden until you have been given the right access to it. For instance Getters or setters by the programmer who wrote the Parent. If they are not visible by that either then accept the fact that they are just private and not accessible to you. Why exactly you want to do that??
I don't know about Java, but in some languages nested types can do this:
class A {
private string someField;
class B : A {
void Foo() {
someField = "abc";
}
}
}
Otherwise, use an accessor method or a protected field (although they are often abused).
A private member is accessible in subclass in a way that you cannot change the variable, but you are able to access the variable as read only.
Obviously, making them protected, or adding setters/getters is the preferred technique. Reflection is a desperation option.
Just to show off to the interviewer, IF "access" means read access, and IF Class A generates XML or JSON etc., you could serialize A and parse the interesting fields.
Class A
{
private int i;
int getValue()
{
return i;
}
}
class B extends A
{
void getvalue2()
{
A a1= new A();
sop(a1.getValue());
}
}
To access private variables of parent class in subclass you can use protected or add getters and setters to private variables in parent class..
You can't access directly any private variables of a class from outside directly.
You can access private member's using getter and setter.
Ways to access the superclass private members in subclass :
If you want package access just change the private fields to protected. It allows access to same package subclass.
If you have private fields then just provide some Accessor Methods(getters) and you can access them in your subclass.
You can also use inner class e.g
public class PrivateInnerClassAccess {
private int value=20;
class InnerClass {
public void accessPrivateFields() {
System.out.println("Value of private field : " + value);
}
}
public static void main(String arr[])
{
PrivateInnerClassAccess access = new PrivateInnerClassAccess();
PrivateInnerClassAccess.InnerClass innerClass = access.new InnerClass();
innerClass.accessPrivateFields();
}
}
4 .You can also use Reflection e.g
public class A {
private int value;
public A(int value)
{
this.value = value;
}
}
public class B {
public void accessPrivateA()throws Exception
{
A a = new A(10);
Field privateFields = A.class.getDeclaredField("value");
privateFields.setAccessible(true);
Integer value = (Integer)privateFields.get(a);
System.out.println("Value of private field is :"+value);
}
public static void main(String arr[]) throws Exception
{
B b = new B();
b.accessPrivateA();
}
}
You can use Accessors (getter and setter method) in your Code.
By using setter method you can use else with the help of refection you can use private member of class by setting that member say a -
take a from class
and set a.setAccessible(true);
You may want to change it to protected.
Kindly refer this
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/javaOO/accesscontrol.html
If this is something you have to do at any cost just for the heck of doing it you can use reflection. It will give you list of all the variables defined in the class- be it public, private or protected. This surely has its overhead but yes, it is something which will let you use private variables. With this, you can use it in any of the class. It does not have to be only a subclass
Please refer to the example below. This may have some compilation issues but you can get the basic idea and it works
private void getPropertiesFromPrivateClass(){
Field[] privateVariablesArray = PrivateClassName.getClass().getDeclaredFields();
Set<String> propertySet = new HashSet<String>();
Object propertyValue;
if(privateVariablesArray.length >0){
for(Field propertyVariable :privateVariablesArray){
try {
if (propertyVariable.getType() == String.class){
propertyVariable.setAccessible(true);
propertyValue = propertyVariable.get(envtHelper);
System.out.println("propertyValue");
}
} catch (IllegalArgumentException illegalArgumentException) {
illegalArgumentException.printStackTrace();
} catch (IllegalAccessException illegalAccessException) {
illegalAccessException.printStackTrace();
}
}
Hope this be of some help.
Happy Learning :)
Below is the example for accessing the private members of superclass in the object of subclass.
I am using constructors to do the same.
Below is the superclass Fruit
public class Fruit {
private String type;
public Fruit() {
}
public Fruit(String type) {
super();
this.type = type;
}
public String getType() {
return type;
}
public void setType(String type) {
this.type = type;
}
}
Below is subclass Guava which is inheriting from Fruit
public class Guava extends Fruit{
private String name;
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public void setName(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
public Guava(String name,String type) {
super(type);
this.name=name;
}
}
Below is the main function where we are creating an object of subclass and also displaying the member of superclass.
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Guava G1=new Guava("kanpuria", "red");
System.out.println(G1.getName()+" "+G1.getType());
}
}
Note that a private field of a superclass might be accessible to a subclass (for example,if both classes are memebers of the same class),Nevertheless,a private field is never inherited
by a subclass
Simple!!!
public class A{
private String a;
private String b;
//getter and setter are here
}
public class B extends A{
public B(String a, String b){ //constructor
super(a,b)//from here you got access with private variable of class A
}
}
thanks
Directly we can't access it. but Using Setter and Getter we can access,
Code is :
class AccessPrivate1 {
private int a=10; //private integer
private int b=15;
int getValueofA()
{
return this.a;
}
int getValueofB()
{
return this.b;
}
}
public class AccessPrivate{
public static void main(String args[])
{
AccessPrivate1 obj=new AccessPrivate1();
System.out.println(obj.getValueofA()); //getting the value of private integer of class AccessPrivate1
System.out.println(obj.getValueofB()); //getting the value of private integer of class AccessPrivate1
}
}
Modifiers are keywords that you add to those definitions to change their meanings. The Java language has a wide variety of modifiers, including the following:
Java Access Modifiers
Non Access Modifiers
To use a modifier, you include its keyword in the definition of a class, method, or variable. The modifier precedes the rest of the statement.
There is more information here:
http://tutorialcorejava.blogspot.in/p/java-modifier-types.html

Categories

Resources