Related
My understanding is that you cannot reference a variable before it has been declared, and that all code (including instance initializers) that is within the body of a class, but outside of any method, is executed in order before constructor when the object is created (the exception being static variables and initializer blocks, which are run in order at the beginning of the program, to initialize the entire class). Why, then, does the following code compile (and run!):
public class WhyIsThisOk {
{ a = 5; } // why is this ok???
int a = 10;
public WhyIsThisOk() {
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
WhyIsThisOk why = new WhyIsThisOk();
System.out.println(why.a); // 10
}
}
From docs:
The Java compiler copies initializer blocks into every constructor.
Therefore, this approach can be used to share a block of code between
multiple constructors.
The above statement is slightly misleading, because if we follow the explanation of the above doc we can rewrite the original code like this:
public class WrongVersionOfWhyIsThisOk {
int a = 10;
public WhyIsThisOk (){
a = 5;
}
public static void main(String[] args){
WrongVersionOfWhyIsThisOk why = new WrongVersionOfWhyIsThisOk ();
System.out.println(why.a);
}
}
But running WrongVersionOfWhyIsThisOk will produce 5 instead of 10 that original code produces.
But in reality it is both the initializer block and variable assignment are copied into constructor:
public class RightVersionOfWhyIsThisOk {
int a;
public RightVersionOfWhyIsThisOk (){
a = 5;
a = 10;
}
public static void main(String[] args){
RightVersionOfWhyIsThisOk why = new RightVersionOfWhyIsThisOk ();
System.out.println(why.a);
}
}
Update:
Here is the doc describing in detail the initialization order and constructor invocation:
4) Execute the instance initializers and instance variable
initializers for this class, assigning the values of instance variable
initializers to the corresponding instance variables, in the
left-to-right order in which they appear textually in the source code
for the class. If execution of any of these initializers results in an
exception, then no further initializers are processed and this
procedure completes abruptly with that same exception. Otherwise,
continue with step 5.
5) Execute the rest of the body of this constructor. If that execution
completes abruptly, then this procedure completes abruptly for the
same reason. Otherwise, this procedure completes normally.
From docs:
8.3.2.3. Restrictions on the use of Fields during Initialization
The declaration of a member needs to appear textually before it is
used only if the member is an instance (respectively static) field of
a class or interface C and all of the following conditions hold:
The usage occurs in an instance (respectively static) variable initializer of C or in an instance (respectively static) initializer
of C.
The usage is not on the left hand side of an assignment.
The usage is via a simple name.
C is the innermost class or interface enclosing the usage.
It is a compile-time error if any of the four requirements above are
not met
In this case, the usage is on the left hand side of the assignment, so it is not a compile-time error.
The contents of initializer block are executed whenever any constructor is invoked (before the constructor’s contents).
So you can provide reference to any variables as they will not be used unless a constructor is invoked aka. object is created.
The instance initialization blocs are called at the instance creation time.so it is normal that After the creation of the why object, it Works.
The order of initialization is:
static bloc
constructor
instance blocs on order of appearance
The order of declaration is not important. You could also write:
public class WhyIsThisOk {
{
a = 5;
}
public WhyIsThisOk() {
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(new WhyIsThisOk().a);
}
int a = 10;
}
Important is, that the compiler copies (top down) first a=5 and then a=10 into constructor so it looks like:
public WhyIsThisOk() {
a = 5;
a = 10;
}
Finally look at this example:
public class WhyIsThisOk {
{
a = get5();
}
public WhyIsThisOk() {
a = get7();
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(new WhyIsThisOk().a);
}
int a = get10();
public static int get5() {
System.out.println("get5 from: " + new Exception().getStackTrace()[1].getMethodName());
return 5;
}
public static int get7() {
System.out.println("get7 from: " + new Exception().getStackTrace()[1].getMethodName());
return 7;
}
public static int get10() {
System.out.println("get10 from: " + new Exception().getStackTrace()[1].getMethodName());
return 10;
}
}
Output is:
get5 from: <init>
get10 from: <init>
get7 from: <init>
7
a can only be final here. Why? How can I reassign a in onClick() method without keeping it as private member?
private void f(Button b, final int a){
b.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
int b = a*5;
}
});
}
How can I return the 5 * a when it clicked? I mean,
private void f(Button b, final int a){
b.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
int b = a*5;
return b; // but return type is void
}
});
}
As noted in comments, some of this becomes irrelevant in Java 8, where final can be implicit. Only an effectively final variable can be used in an anonymous inner class or lambda expression though.
It's basically due to the way Java manages closures.
When you create an instance of an anonymous inner class, any variables which are used within that class have their values copied in via the autogenerated constructor. This avoids the compiler having to autogenerate various extra types to hold the logical state of the "local variables", as for example the C# compiler does... (When C# captures a variable in an anonymous function, it really captures the variable - the closure can update the variable in a way which is seen by the main body of the method, and vice versa.)
As the value has been copied into the instance of the anonymous inner class, it would look odd if the variable could be modified by the rest of the method - you could have code which appeared to be working with an out-of-date variable (because that's effectively what would be happening... you'd be working with a copy taken at a different time). Likewise if you could make changes within the anonymous inner class, developers might expect those changes to be visible within the body of the enclosing method.
Making the variable final removes all these possibilities - as the value can't be changed at all, you don't need to worry about whether such changes will be visible. The only ways to allow the method and the anonymous inner class see each other's changes is to use a mutable type of some description. This could be the enclosing class itself, an array, a mutable wrapper type... anything like that. Basically it's a bit like communicating between one method and another: changes made to the parameters of one method aren't seen by its caller, but changes made to the objects referred to by the parameters are seen.
If you're interested in a more detailed comparison between Java and C# closures, I have an article which goes into it further. I wanted to focus on the Java side in this answer :)
There is a trick that allows anonymous class to update data in the outer scope.
private void f(Button b, final int a) {
final int[] res = new int[1];
b.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
res[0] = a * 5;
}
});
// But at this point handler is most likely not executed yet!
// How should we now res[0] is ready?
}
However, this trick is not very good due to the synchronization issues. If handler is invoked later, you need to 1) synchronize access to res if handler was invoked from the different thread 2) need to have some sort of flag or indication that res was updated
This trick works OK, though, if anonymous class is invoked in the same thread immediately. Like:
// ...
final int[] res = new int[1];
Runnable r = new Runnable() { public void run() { res[0] = 123; } };
r.run();
System.out.println(res[0]);
// ...
An anonymous class is an inner class and the strict rule applies to inner classes (JLS 8.1.3):
Any local variable, formal method parameter or exception handler parameter used but not declared in an inner class must be declared final. Any local variable, used but not declared in an inner class must be definitely assigned before the body of the inner class.
I haven't found a reason or an explanation on the jls or jvms yet, but we do know, that the compiler creates a separate class file for each inner class and it has to make sure, that the methods declared on this class file (on byte code level) at least have access to the values of local variables.
(Jon has the complete answer - I keep this one undeleted because one might interested in the JLS rule)
You can create a class level variable to get returned value. I mean
class A {
int k = 0;
private void f(Button b, int a){
b.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
k = a * 5;
}
});
}
now you can get value of K and use it where you want.
Answer of your why is :
A local inner class instance is tied to Main class and can access the final local variables of its containing method. When the instance uses a final local of its containing method, the variable retains the value it held at the time of the instance's creation, even if the variable has gone out of scope (this is effectively Java's crude, limited version of closures).
Because a local inner class is neither the member of a class or package, it is not declared with an access level. (Be clear, however, that its own members have access levels like in a normal class.)
To understand the rationale for this restriction, consider the following program:
public class Program {
interface Interface {
public void printInteger();
}
static Interface interfaceInstance = null;
static void initialize(int val) {
class Impl implements Interface {
#Override
public void printInteger() {
System.out.println(val);
}
}
interfaceInstance = new Impl();
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
initialize(12345);
interfaceInstance.printInteger();
}
}
The interfaceInstance remains in memory after the initialize method returns, but the parameter val does not. The JVM can’t access a local variable outside its scope, so Java makes the subsequent call to printInteger work by copying the value of val to an implicit field of the same name within interfaceInstance. The interfaceInstance is said to have captured the value of the local parameter. If the parameter weren’t final (or effectively final) its value could change, becoming out of sync with the captured value, potentially causing unintuitive behavior.
Well, in Java, a variable can be final not just as a parameter, but as a class-level field, like
public class Test
{
public final int a = 3;
or as a local variable, like
public static void main(String[] args)
{
final int a = 3;
If you want to access and modify a variable from an anonymous class, you might want to make the variable a class-level variable in the enclosing class.
public class Test
{
public int a;
public void doSomething()
{
Runnable runnable =
new Runnable()
{
public void run()
{
System.out.println(a);
a = a+1;
}
};
}
}
You can't have a variable as final and give it a new value. final means just that: the value is unchangeable and final.
And since it's final, Java can safely copy it to local anonymous classes. You're not getting some reference to the int (especially since you can't have references to primitives like int in Java, just references to Objects).
It just copies over the value of a into an implicit int called a in your anonymous class.
The reason why the access has been restricted only to the local final variables is that if all the local variables would be made accessible then they would first required to be copied to a separate section where inner classes can have access to them and maintaining multiple copies of mutable local variables may lead to inconsistent data. Whereas final variables are immutable and hence any number of copies to them will not have any impact on the consistency of data.
When an anonymous inner class is defined within the body of a method, all variables declared final in the scope of that method are accessible from within the inner class. For scalar values, once it has been assigned, the value of the final variable cannot change. For object values, the reference cannot change. This allows the Java compiler to "capture" the value of the variable at run-time and store a copy as a field in the inner class. Once the outer method has terminated and its stack frame has been removed, the original variable is gone but the inner class's private copy persists in the class's own memory.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_%28Java%29)
Methods within an anonomyous inner class may be invoked well after the thread that spawned it has terminated. In your example, the inner class will be invoked on the event dispatch thread and not in the same thread as that which created it. Hence, the scope of the variables will be different. So to protect such variable assignment scope issues you must declare them final.
private void f(Button b, final int a[]) {
b.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
a[0] = a[0] * 5;
}
});
}
As Jon has the implementation details answer an other possible answer would be that the JVM doesn't want to handle write in record that have ended his activation.
Consider the use case where your lambdas instead of being apply, is stored in some place and run later.
I remember that in Smalltalk you would get an illegal store raised when you do such modification.
Try this code,
Create Array List and put value inside that and return it :
private ArrayList f(Button b, final int a)
{
final ArrayList al = new ArrayList();
b.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
int b = a*5;
al.add(b);
}
});
return al;
}
Java anonymous class is very similar to Javascript closure, but Java implement that in different way. (check Andersen's answer)
So in order not to confuse the Java Developer with the strange behavior that might occur for those coming from Javascript background. I guess that's why they force us to use final, this is not the JVM limitation.
Let's look at the Javascript example below:
var add = (function () {
var counter = 0;
var func = function () {
console.log("counter now = " + counter);
counter += 1;
};
counter = 100; // line 1, this one need to be final in Java
return func;
})();
add(); // this will print out 100 in Javascript but 0 in Java
In Javascript, the counter value will be 100, because there is only one counter variable from the beginning to end.
But in Java, if there is no final, it will print out 0, because while the inner object is being created, the 0 value is copied to the inner class object's hidden properties. (there are two integer variable here, one in the local method, another one in inner class hidden properties)
So any changes after the inner object creation (like line 1), it will not affect the inner object. So it will make confusion between two different outcome and behaviour (between Java and Javascript).
I believe that's why, Java decide to force it to be final, so the data is 'consistent' from the beginning to end.
Java final variable inside an inner class[About]
inner class can use only
reference from outer class
final local variables from out of scope which are a reference type (e.g. Object...)
value(primitive) (e.g. int...) type can be wrapped by a final reference type. IntelliJ IDEA can help you covert it to one element array
When a non static nested (inner class) is generated by compiler - a new class - <OuterClass>$<InnerClass>.class is created and bounded parameters are passed into constructor[Local variable on stack] It is similar to closure[Swift about]
final variable is a variable which can not be reassign. final reference variable still can be changed by modifying a state
If it was be possible it would be weird because as a programmer you could make like this
//Not possible
private void foo() {
MyClass myClass = new MyClass(); //Case 1: myClass address is 1
int a = 5; //Case 2: a = 5
//just as an example
new Button().addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
/*
myClass.something(); //<- what is the address - 1 or 2?
int b = a; //<- what is the value - 5 or 10 ?
//illusion that next changes are visible for Outer class
myClass = new MyClass();
a = 15;
*/
}
});
myClass = new MyClass(); //Case 1: myClass address is 2
int a = 10; //Case 2: a = 10
}
Maybe this trick gives u an idea
Boolean var= new anonymousClass(){
private String myVar; //String for example
#Overriden public Boolean method(int i){
//use myVar and i
}
public String setVar(String var){myVar=var; return this;} //Returns self instane
}.setVar("Hello").method(3);
My question is about one particular usage of static keyword. It is possible to use static keyword to cover a code block within a class which does not belong to any function. For example following code compiles:
public class Test {
private static final int a;
static {
a = 5;
doSomething(a);
}
private static int doSomething(int x) {
return (x+5);
}
}
If you remove the static keyword it complains because the variable a is final. However it is possible to remove both final and static keywords and make it compile.
It is confusing for me in both ways. How am I supposed to have a code section that does not belong to any method? How is it possible to invoke it? In general, what is the purpose of this usage? Or better, where can I find documentation about this?
The code block with the static modifier signifies a class initializer; without the static modifier the code block is an instance initializer.
Class initializers are executed in the order they are defined (top down, just like simple variable initializers) when the class is loaded (actually, when it's resolved, but that's a technicality).
Instance initializers are executed in the order defined when the class is instantiated, immediately before the constructor code is executed, immediately after the invocation of the super constructor.
If you remove static from int a, it becomes an instance variable, which you are not able to access from the static initializer block. This will fail to compile with the error "non-static variable a cannot be referenced from a static context".
If you also remove static from the initializer block, it then becomes an instance initializer and so int a is initialized at construction.
Uff! what is static initializer?
The static initializer is a static {} block of code inside java class, and run only one time before the constructor or main method is called.
OK! Tell me more...
is a block of code static { ... } inside any java class. and executed by virtual machine when class is called.
No return statements are supported.
No arguments are supported.
No this or super are supported.
Hmm where can I use it?
Can be used anywhere you feel ok :) that simple. But I see most of the time it is used when doing database connection, API init, Logging and etc.
Don't just bark! where is example?
package com.example.learnjava;
import java.util.ArrayList;
public class Fruit {
static {
System.out.println("Inside Static Initializer.");
// fruits array
ArrayList<String> fruits = new ArrayList<>();
fruits.add("Apple");
fruits.add("Orange");
fruits.add("Pear");
// print fruits
for (String fruit : fruits) {
System.out.println(fruit);
}
System.out.println("End Static Initializer.\n");
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("Inside Main Method.");
}
}
Output???
Inside Static Initializer.
Apple
Orange
Pear
End Static Initializer.
Inside Main Method.
The static block is a "static initializer".
It's automatically invoked when the class is loaded, and there's no other way to invoke it (not even via Reflection).
I've personally only ever used it when writing JNI code:
class JNIGlue {
static {
System.loadLibrary("foo");
}
}
This is directly from http://www.programcreek.com/2011/10/java-class-instance-initializers/
1. Execution Order
Look at the following class, do you know which one gets executed first?
public class Foo {
//instance variable initializer
String s = "abc";
//constructor
public Foo() {
System.out.println("constructor called");
}
//static initializer
static {
System.out.println("static initializer called");
}
//instance initializer
{
System.out.println("instance initializer called");
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
new Foo();
new Foo();
}
}
Output:
static initializer called
instance initializer called
constructor called
instance initializer called
constructor called
2. How do Java instance initializer work?
The instance initializer above contains a println statement. To understand how it works, we can treat it as a variable assignment statement, e.g., b = 0. This can make it more obvious to understand.
Instead of
int b = 0, you could write
int b;
b = 0;
Therefore, instance initializers and instance variable initializers are pretty much the same.
3. When are instance initializers useful?
The use of instance initializers are rare, but still it can be a useful alternative to instance variable initializers if:
Initializer code must handle exceptions
Perform calculations that can’t be expressed with an instance variable initializer.
Of course, such code could be written in constructors. But if a class had multiple constructors, you would have to repeat the code in each constructor.
With an instance initializer, you can just write the code once, and it will be executed no matter what constructor is used to create the object. (I guess this is just a concept, and it is not used often.)
Another case in which instance initializers are useful is anonymous inner classes, which can’t declare any constructors at all. (Will this be a good place to place a logging function?)
Thanks to Derhein.
Also note that Anonymous classes that implement interfaces [1] have no constructors. Therefore instance initializers are needed to execute any kinds of expressions at construction time.
"final" guarantees that a variable must be initialized before end of object initializer code. Likewise "static final" guarantees that a variable will be initialized by the end of class initialization code. Omitting the "static" from your initialization code turns it into object initialization code; thus your variable no longer satisfies its guarantees.
You will not write code into a static block that needs to be invoked anywhere in your program. If the purpose of the code is to be invoked then you must place it in a method.
You can write static initializer blocks to initialize static variables when the class is loaded but this code can be more complex..
A static initializer block looks like a method with no name, no arguments, and no return type. Since you never call it it doesn't need a name. The only time its called is when the virtual machine loads the class.
when a developer use an initializer block, the Java Compiler copies the initializer into each constructor of the current class.
Example:
the following code:
class MyClass {
private int myField = 3;
{
myField = myField + 2;
//myField is worth 5 for all instance
}
public MyClass() {
myField = myField * 4;
//myField is worth 20 for all instance initialized with this construtor
}
public MyClass(int _myParam) {
if (_myParam > 0) {
myField = myField * 4;
//myField is worth 20 for all instance initialized with this construtor
//if _myParam is greater than 0
} else {
myField = myField + 5;
//myField is worth 10 for all instance initialized with this construtor
//if _myParam is lower than 0 or if _myParam is worth 0
}
}
public void setMyField(int _myField) {
myField = _myField;
}
public int getMyField() {
return myField;
}
}
public class MainClass{
public static void main(String[] args) {
MyClass myFirstInstance_ = new MyClass();
System.out.println(myFirstInstance_.getMyField());//20
MyClass mySecondInstance_ = new MyClass(1);
System.out.println(mySecondInstance_.getMyField());//20
MyClass myThirdInstance_ = new MyClass(-1);
System.out.println(myThirdInstance_.getMyField());//10
}
}
is equivalent to:
class MyClass {
private int myField = 3;
public MyClass() {
myField = myField + 2;
myField = myField * 4;
//myField is worth 20 for all instance initialized with this construtor
}
public MyClass(int _myParam) {
myField = myField + 2;
if (_myParam > 0) {
myField = myField * 4;
//myField is worth 20 for all instance initialized with this construtor
//if _myParam is greater than 0
} else {
myField = myField + 5;
//myField is worth 10 for all instance initialized with this construtor
//if _myParam is lower than 0 or if _myParam is worth 0
}
}
public void setMyField(int _myField) {
myField = _myField;
}
public int getMyField() {
return myField;
}
}
public class MainClass{
public static void main(String[] args) {
MyClass myFirstInstance_ = new MyClass();
System.out.println(myFirstInstance_.getMyField());//20
MyClass mySecondInstance_ = new MyClass(1);
System.out.println(mySecondInstance_.getMyField());//20
MyClass myThirdInstance_ = new MyClass(-1);
System.out.println(myThirdInstance_.getMyField());//10
}
}
I hope my example is understood by developers.
The static code block can be used to instantiate or initialize class variables (as opposed to object variables). So declaring "a" static means that is only one shared by all Test objects, and the static code block initializes "a" only once, when the Test class is first loaded, no matter how many Test objects are created.
The static initializer blocks are invoked (in the order they were defined in) when the JVM loads the class into memory, and before the main method. It's used to conditionally initialize static variables.
Similarly we have the instance initializer blocks (aka IIBs) which are invoked upon object instantiation, and they're generally used to de-duplicate constructor logic.
The order in which initializers and constructors are executed is:
Static initializer blocks;
Object initializer blocks;
Constructors;
My question is about one particular usage of static keyword. It is possible to use static keyword to cover a code block within a class which does not belong to any function. For example following code compiles:
public class Test {
private static final int a;
static {
a = 5;
doSomething(a);
}
private static int doSomething(int x) {
return (x+5);
}
}
If you remove the static keyword it complains because the variable a is final. However it is possible to remove both final and static keywords and make it compile.
It is confusing for me in both ways. How am I supposed to have a code section that does not belong to any method? How is it possible to invoke it? In general, what is the purpose of this usage? Or better, where can I find documentation about this?
The code block with the static modifier signifies a class initializer; without the static modifier the code block is an instance initializer.
Class initializers are executed in the order they are defined (top down, just like simple variable initializers) when the class is loaded (actually, when it's resolved, but that's a technicality).
Instance initializers are executed in the order defined when the class is instantiated, immediately before the constructor code is executed, immediately after the invocation of the super constructor.
If you remove static from int a, it becomes an instance variable, which you are not able to access from the static initializer block. This will fail to compile with the error "non-static variable a cannot be referenced from a static context".
If you also remove static from the initializer block, it then becomes an instance initializer and so int a is initialized at construction.
Uff! what is static initializer?
The static initializer is a static {} block of code inside java class, and run only one time before the constructor or main method is called.
OK! Tell me more...
is a block of code static { ... } inside any java class. and executed by virtual machine when class is called.
No return statements are supported.
No arguments are supported.
No this or super are supported.
Hmm where can I use it?
Can be used anywhere you feel ok :) that simple. But I see most of the time it is used when doing database connection, API init, Logging and etc.
Don't just bark! where is example?
package com.example.learnjava;
import java.util.ArrayList;
public class Fruit {
static {
System.out.println("Inside Static Initializer.");
// fruits array
ArrayList<String> fruits = new ArrayList<>();
fruits.add("Apple");
fruits.add("Orange");
fruits.add("Pear");
// print fruits
for (String fruit : fruits) {
System.out.println(fruit);
}
System.out.println("End Static Initializer.\n");
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("Inside Main Method.");
}
}
Output???
Inside Static Initializer.
Apple
Orange
Pear
End Static Initializer.
Inside Main Method.
The static block is a "static initializer".
It's automatically invoked when the class is loaded, and there's no other way to invoke it (not even via Reflection).
I've personally only ever used it when writing JNI code:
class JNIGlue {
static {
System.loadLibrary("foo");
}
}
This is directly from http://www.programcreek.com/2011/10/java-class-instance-initializers/
1. Execution Order
Look at the following class, do you know which one gets executed first?
public class Foo {
//instance variable initializer
String s = "abc";
//constructor
public Foo() {
System.out.println("constructor called");
}
//static initializer
static {
System.out.println("static initializer called");
}
//instance initializer
{
System.out.println("instance initializer called");
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
new Foo();
new Foo();
}
}
Output:
static initializer called
instance initializer called
constructor called
instance initializer called
constructor called
2. How do Java instance initializer work?
The instance initializer above contains a println statement. To understand how it works, we can treat it as a variable assignment statement, e.g., b = 0. This can make it more obvious to understand.
Instead of
int b = 0, you could write
int b;
b = 0;
Therefore, instance initializers and instance variable initializers are pretty much the same.
3. When are instance initializers useful?
The use of instance initializers are rare, but still it can be a useful alternative to instance variable initializers if:
Initializer code must handle exceptions
Perform calculations that can’t be expressed with an instance variable initializer.
Of course, such code could be written in constructors. But if a class had multiple constructors, you would have to repeat the code in each constructor.
With an instance initializer, you can just write the code once, and it will be executed no matter what constructor is used to create the object. (I guess this is just a concept, and it is not used often.)
Another case in which instance initializers are useful is anonymous inner classes, which can’t declare any constructors at all. (Will this be a good place to place a logging function?)
Thanks to Derhein.
Also note that Anonymous classes that implement interfaces [1] have no constructors. Therefore instance initializers are needed to execute any kinds of expressions at construction time.
"final" guarantees that a variable must be initialized before end of object initializer code. Likewise "static final" guarantees that a variable will be initialized by the end of class initialization code. Omitting the "static" from your initialization code turns it into object initialization code; thus your variable no longer satisfies its guarantees.
You will not write code into a static block that needs to be invoked anywhere in your program. If the purpose of the code is to be invoked then you must place it in a method.
You can write static initializer blocks to initialize static variables when the class is loaded but this code can be more complex..
A static initializer block looks like a method with no name, no arguments, and no return type. Since you never call it it doesn't need a name. The only time its called is when the virtual machine loads the class.
when a developer use an initializer block, the Java Compiler copies the initializer into each constructor of the current class.
Example:
the following code:
class MyClass {
private int myField = 3;
{
myField = myField + 2;
//myField is worth 5 for all instance
}
public MyClass() {
myField = myField * 4;
//myField is worth 20 for all instance initialized with this construtor
}
public MyClass(int _myParam) {
if (_myParam > 0) {
myField = myField * 4;
//myField is worth 20 for all instance initialized with this construtor
//if _myParam is greater than 0
} else {
myField = myField + 5;
//myField is worth 10 for all instance initialized with this construtor
//if _myParam is lower than 0 or if _myParam is worth 0
}
}
public void setMyField(int _myField) {
myField = _myField;
}
public int getMyField() {
return myField;
}
}
public class MainClass{
public static void main(String[] args) {
MyClass myFirstInstance_ = new MyClass();
System.out.println(myFirstInstance_.getMyField());//20
MyClass mySecondInstance_ = new MyClass(1);
System.out.println(mySecondInstance_.getMyField());//20
MyClass myThirdInstance_ = new MyClass(-1);
System.out.println(myThirdInstance_.getMyField());//10
}
}
is equivalent to:
class MyClass {
private int myField = 3;
public MyClass() {
myField = myField + 2;
myField = myField * 4;
//myField is worth 20 for all instance initialized with this construtor
}
public MyClass(int _myParam) {
myField = myField + 2;
if (_myParam > 0) {
myField = myField * 4;
//myField is worth 20 for all instance initialized with this construtor
//if _myParam is greater than 0
} else {
myField = myField + 5;
//myField is worth 10 for all instance initialized with this construtor
//if _myParam is lower than 0 or if _myParam is worth 0
}
}
public void setMyField(int _myField) {
myField = _myField;
}
public int getMyField() {
return myField;
}
}
public class MainClass{
public static void main(String[] args) {
MyClass myFirstInstance_ = new MyClass();
System.out.println(myFirstInstance_.getMyField());//20
MyClass mySecondInstance_ = new MyClass(1);
System.out.println(mySecondInstance_.getMyField());//20
MyClass myThirdInstance_ = new MyClass(-1);
System.out.println(myThirdInstance_.getMyField());//10
}
}
I hope my example is understood by developers.
The static code block can be used to instantiate or initialize class variables (as opposed to object variables). So declaring "a" static means that is only one shared by all Test objects, and the static code block initializes "a" only once, when the Test class is first loaded, no matter how many Test objects are created.
The static initializer blocks are invoked (in the order they were defined in) when the JVM loads the class into memory, and before the main method. It's used to conditionally initialize static variables.
Similarly we have the instance initializer blocks (aka IIBs) which are invoked upon object instantiation, and they're generally used to de-duplicate constructor logic.
The order in which initializers and constructors are executed is:
Static initializer blocks;
Object initializer blocks;
Constructors;
a can only be final here. Why? How can I reassign a in onClick() method without keeping it as private member?
private void f(Button b, final int a){
b.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
int b = a*5;
}
});
}
How can I return the 5 * a when it clicked? I mean,
private void f(Button b, final int a){
b.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
int b = a*5;
return b; // but return type is void
}
});
}
As noted in comments, some of this becomes irrelevant in Java 8, where final can be implicit. Only an effectively final variable can be used in an anonymous inner class or lambda expression though.
It's basically due to the way Java manages closures.
When you create an instance of an anonymous inner class, any variables which are used within that class have their values copied in via the autogenerated constructor. This avoids the compiler having to autogenerate various extra types to hold the logical state of the "local variables", as for example the C# compiler does... (When C# captures a variable in an anonymous function, it really captures the variable - the closure can update the variable in a way which is seen by the main body of the method, and vice versa.)
As the value has been copied into the instance of the anonymous inner class, it would look odd if the variable could be modified by the rest of the method - you could have code which appeared to be working with an out-of-date variable (because that's effectively what would be happening... you'd be working with a copy taken at a different time). Likewise if you could make changes within the anonymous inner class, developers might expect those changes to be visible within the body of the enclosing method.
Making the variable final removes all these possibilities - as the value can't be changed at all, you don't need to worry about whether such changes will be visible. The only ways to allow the method and the anonymous inner class see each other's changes is to use a mutable type of some description. This could be the enclosing class itself, an array, a mutable wrapper type... anything like that. Basically it's a bit like communicating between one method and another: changes made to the parameters of one method aren't seen by its caller, but changes made to the objects referred to by the parameters are seen.
If you're interested in a more detailed comparison between Java and C# closures, I have an article which goes into it further. I wanted to focus on the Java side in this answer :)
There is a trick that allows anonymous class to update data in the outer scope.
private void f(Button b, final int a) {
final int[] res = new int[1];
b.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
res[0] = a * 5;
}
});
// But at this point handler is most likely not executed yet!
// How should we now res[0] is ready?
}
However, this trick is not very good due to the synchronization issues. If handler is invoked later, you need to 1) synchronize access to res if handler was invoked from the different thread 2) need to have some sort of flag or indication that res was updated
This trick works OK, though, if anonymous class is invoked in the same thread immediately. Like:
// ...
final int[] res = new int[1];
Runnable r = new Runnable() { public void run() { res[0] = 123; } };
r.run();
System.out.println(res[0]);
// ...
An anonymous class is an inner class and the strict rule applies to inner classes (JLS 8.1.3):
Any local variable, formal method parameter or exception handler parameter used but not declared in an inner class must be declared final. Any local variable, used but not declared in an inner class must be definitely assigned before the body of the inner class.
I haven't found a reason or an explanation on the jls or jvms yet, but we do know, that the compiler creates a separate class file for each inner class and it has to make sure, that the methods declared on this class file (on byte code level) at least have access to the values of local variables.
(Jon has the complete answer - I keep this one undeleted because one might interested in the JLS rule)
You can create a class level variable to get returned value. I mean
class A {
int k = 0;
private void f(Button b, int a){
b.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
k = a * 5;
}
});
}
now you can get value of K and use it where you want.
Answer of your why is :
A local inner class instance is tied to Main class and can access the final local variables of its containing method. When the instance uses a final local of its containing method, the variable retains the value it held at the time of the instance's creation, even if the variable has gone out of scope (this is effectively Java's crude, limited version of closures).
Because a local inner class is neither the member of a class or package, it is not declared with an access level. (Be clear, however, that its own members have access levels like in a normal class.)
To understand the rationale for this restriction, consider the following program:
public class Program {
interface Interface {
public void printInteger();
}
static Interface interfaceInstance = null;
static void initialize(int val) {
class Impl implements Interface {
#Override
public void printInteger() {
System.out.println(val);
}
}
interfaceInstance = new Impl();
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
initialize(12345);
interfaceInstance.printInteger();
}
}
The interfaceInstance remains in memory after the initialize method returns, but the parameter val does not. The JVM can’t access a local variable outside its scope, so Java makes the subsequent call to printInteger work by copying the value of val to an implicit field of the same name within interfaceInstance. The interfaceInstance is said to have captured the value of the local parameter. If the parameter weren’t final (or effectively final) its value could change, becoming out of sync with the captured value, potentially causing unintuitive behavior.
Well, in Java, a variable can be final not just as a parameter, but as a class-level field, like
public class Test
{
public final int a = 3;
or as a local variable, like
public static void main(String[] args)
{
final int a = 3;
If you want to access and modify a variable from an anonymous class, you might want to make the variable a class-level variable in the enclosing class.
public class Test
{
public int a;
public void doSomething()
{
Runnable runnable =
new Runnable()
{
public void run()
{
System.out.println(a);
a = a+1;
}
};
}
}
You can't have a variable as final and give it a new value. final means just that: the value is unchangeable and final.
And since it's final, Java can safely copy it to local anonymous classes. You're not getting some reference to the int (especially since you can't have references to primitives like int in Java, just references to Objects).
It just copies over the value of a into an implicit int called a in your anonymous class.
The reason why the access has been restricted only to the local final variables is that if all the local variables would be made accessible then they would first required to be copied to a separate section where inner classes can have access to them and maintaining multiple copies of mutable local variables may lead to inconsistent data. Whereas final variables are immutable and hence any number of copies to them will not have any impact on the consistency of data.
When an anonymous inner class is defined within the body of a method, all variables declared final in the scope of that method are accessible from within the inner class. For scalar values, once it has been assigned, the value of the final variable cannot change. For object values, the reference cannot change. This allows the Java compiler to "capture" the value of the variable at run-time and store a copy as a field in the inner class. Once the outer method has terminated and its stack frame has been removed, the original variable is gone but the inner class's private copy persists in the class's own memory.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_%28Java%29)
Methods within an anonomyous inner class may be invoked well after the thread that spawned it has terminated. In your example, the inner class will be invoked on the event dispatch thread and not in the same thread as that which created it. Hence, the scope of the variables will be different. So to protect such variable assignment scope issues you must declare them final.
private void f(Button b, final int a[]) {
b.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
a[0] = a[0] * 5;
}
});
}
As Jon has the implementation details answer an other possible answer would be that the JVM doesn't want to handle write in record that have ended his activation.
Consider the use case where your lambdas instead of being apply, is stored in some place and run later.
I remember that in Smalltalk you would get an illegal store raised when you do such modification.
Try this code,
Create Array List and put value inside that and return it :
private ArrayList f(Button b, final int a)
{
final ArrayList al = new ArrayList();
b.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
int b = a*5;
al.add(b);
}
});
return al;
}
Java anonymous class is very similar to Javascript closure, but Java implement that in different way. (check Andersen's answer)
So in order not to confuse the Java Developer with the strange behavior that might occur for those coming from Javascript background. I guess that's why they force us to use final, this is not the JVM limitation.
Let's look at the Javascript example below:
var add = (function () {
var counter = 0;
var func = function () {
console.log("counter now = " + counter);
counter += 1;
};
counter = 100; // line 1, this one need to be final in Java
return func;
})();
add(); // this will print out 100 in Javascript but 0 in Java
In Javascript, the counter value will be 100, because there is only one counter variable from the beginning to end.
But in Java, if there is no final, it will print out 0, because while the inner object is being created, the 0 value is copied to the inner class object's hidden properties. (there are two integer variable here, one in the local method, another one in inner class hidden properties)
So any changes after the inner object creation (like line 1), it will not affect the inner object. So it will make confusion between two different outcome and behaviour (between Java and Javascript).
I believe that's why, Java decide to force it to be final, so the data is 'consistent' from the beginning to end.
Java final variable inside an inner class[About]
inner class can use only
reference from outer class
final local variables from out of scope which are a reference type (e.g. Object...)
value(primitive) (e.g. int...) type can be wrapped by a final reference type. IntelliJ IDEA can help you covert it to one element array
When a non static nested (inner class) is generated by compiler - a new class - <OuterClass>$<InnerClass>.class is created and bounded parameters are passed into constructor[Local variable on stack] It is similar to closure[Swift about]
final variable is a variable which can not be reassign. final reference variable still can be changed by modifying a state
If it was be possible it would be weird because as a programmer you could make like this
//Not possible
private void foo() {
MyClass myClass = new MyClass(); //Case 1: myClass address is 1
int a = 5; //Case 2: a = 5
//just as an example
new Button().addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
/*
myClass.something(); //<- what is the address - 1 or 2?
int b = a; //<- what is the value - 5 or 10 ?
//illusion that next changes are visible for Outer class
myClass = new MyClass();
a = 15;
*/
}
});
myClass = new MyClass(); //Case 1: myClass address is 2
int a = 10; //Case 2: a = 10
}
Maybe this trick gives u an idea
Boolean var= new anonymousClass(){
private String myVar; //String for example
#Overriden public Boolean method(int i){
//use myVar and i
}
public String setVar(String var){myVar=var; return this;} //Returns self instane
}.setVar("Hello").method(3);