Given the following block of code:
public class Trial {
public static void main (String[] args){
B obj = new B();
obj.doMethod(); #prints "From A".
}
}
class A {
private void method(){System.out.print("from A");}
public void doMethod(){method();}
}
class B extends A {
public void method(){System.out.print("from B");}
public void doMethod(){super.doMethod();}
}
It turns out that the method() from class A is invoked. Why is this?
You explicitly implement it that way. super calls method from base class which is A
public void doMethod(){super.doMethod();}
So the method chaining is like this:
B.doMethod() -> A.doMethod() -> A.method() -> "from A"
I think your question is if in class A private void method(){System.out.print("from A");} is private then why is printing "from A" in class B.
Answer is very simple you can't call method() of A class form any other class .But you can call it with object of its own.
when you calls super.doMethod(); then its function of super and method() is its own method so it can call it.
Because, see below:
class B extends A {
public void method(){System.out.print("from B");}
public void doMethod(){super.doMethod();}
}
Here in Class B's doMethod() you're invoiking Class A's doMethod() using super.doMethod(). So obviously it's printing Class A's doMethod().
You call the doMethod with super keyword. It's means it will call parent implementation
More on super keyword
Your code gives simple object creation (B obj = new B();) and a call using super. Super is used like other people mentioned for parent class. Things could have been different if you try something like (A obj = new B();), which is more interesting.
method() in class A is private and private methods can't be overriden. And when overriding it's better to use #Override annotion.
class B extends A {
#Override
public void method(){System.out.print("from B");} // Compile error
}
A similar thing happens, if you change the method to a static method.
class A {
public static void method(){System.out.print("from A");}
}
class B extends A {
public static void method(){System.out.print("from B");}
}
Related
suppose I have an interface:
public interface abcd{
public int a();
public void b();
public void c();
public String d(String h, String j);
}
and I implement it in some class:
public class xyzw implements abcd{
}
but I want the method d() to be static, but I can't do this:
public class xyzw implements abcd{
public static void c(){
//some code
}
}
neither can I do this:
public interface abcd{
public int a();
public void b();
public static void c();
public String d(String h, String j);
}
I wonder if there is something or some workaround or some language construct which allows me to make a method defined by an interface a static method?
You can define a static method in interface, but only with implementation.
public interface A {
public static void b() {
System.out.println("Hi");
}
}
Overriding of static methods is not allowed in Java, because you call it on Class object, not on implementation object.
If you can implement a static method in an interface, but you cannot overwrite it, remember that a static method is referenced by the class itself and not by an instance of it.
To solve your problem maybe you could define an abstract class
No, its not possible and doesn't make any sense. An interface is meant to be implemented by subclasses you can only hava a non-abstract, implemented, static method in an interface. You could not statically call your interface method with
abcd.c()
when it has no implementation. Thats why static elements can not be overridden.
It's not possible to override static methods in java.
However, in the subclass, you can declare static method with the same name and "mask it as" the original method - which is as close as you can get.
interface a {
public static int f() {
return 0;
}
}
interface b extends a {
public static int f() {
return 1;
}
}
System.out.println(a.f());
>> 0
System.out.println(b.f());
>> 1
I have created some interface such that:
public interface A{
}
and i would like to call the method a that I have already implemented in class B in interface A such that:
public class B{
public boolean a(){
return true;
}
}
public interface A{
public void call {
a();
}
}
without any errors, any help please?
What you want to do is strictly speaking impossible, as you cannot define method implementations in an interface. You can get something similar by defining an implementation of the interface that extends B. Hopefully that is close enough.
public class AImplementation extends B implements A{
public void call(){
a();
}
}
If you are using any java version before 8, then stick with the answers of #tinker and #Davis Broda. They provide better design since they do not couple your interface to the B class. If you insist however, in java 8 you can have default method implementations as well as static methods in an interface.
If your method is for inheritance then you have to use a default method. Add the default keyword:
default void call() {
...
}
Now the problem is how to get a reference to the class in order to call the method since you cannot have instance fields in interfaces. You have two choices:
Pass the object of B as a method parameter:
public interface A{
default void call(B b) {
b.a();
}
}
or make the method in B static
public interface A{
default void call() {
B.a();
}
}
If your method is not for inheritance but just a utility than you can make it static as :
public interface A{
public static void call() {
B.a();
}
}
I agree with #Davis Broda's answer, there is no way to have a method definition in an interface. But I have another way to address this.
You can have the interface and then have an abstract class implement this interface, and then have all other classes extend the abstract class. The abstract class doesn't have to extend the class from where you want to call the method, you could call it from an instance of that class too.
public interface A {
void caller();
}
public class B {
public void callMe() {
}
}
public class AbstractA implements A {
private B b;
public AbstractA(B b) {
this.b = b;
}
#Override
public void caller() {
b.callMe();
}
}
This way, all implementations of AbstractA will be able to call B's callMe method. And you can access this directly from the interface using this code:
A anInstance = someInstance;
anInstance.caller();
Your question is not very clear, but if I'm guessing right, you want interface A to be kind of a generic caller.
If you're using Java 8, you can achive that using a method reference:
public class B {
public boolean a() {
return true;
}
}
public interface A<T> {
default T call(Supplier<T> s) {
return s.get();
}
}
public class AImpl
implements A<Boolean> {
}
public class Sample {
public static void main(String[] args) {
AImpl a = new AImpl();
B b = new B();
boolean result = a.call(b::a);
System.out.println(result); // true
}
}
This uses Supplier<T> because your method a() in class B returns a boolean and does not receive any arguments.
Say I have Class A and Class B. Class B extends Class A. Class A has one method.
public class notimportant
{
public void one()
{
}
}
public class A extends notimportant
{
public void one()
{
//assume there is a super class making this call legal which doesnt do anything
super.one();
System.out.println("blah");
}
}
public class B extends A
{
}
A var1 = new B();
if I call 'var1.one();' will the output end up being:
"blah"
"blah"
because it creates a local copy of 'one()' in Class B and then reads that which calls 'super()' which leads it up to method 'one()' in Class A OR does it just print
"blah"
because it knows to look directly at Class A
EDIT: Hope that is a lot more clear now.
It will follow the way you have it currently written:
-> New object of class B
-> Call method One on this object
-> First line calls supermethod, proceed to execute it
-> Second line prints out after that
Your code doesn't compile at all though, you might want to clear that up. What's keeping you from testing this yourself?
Here's the new situation as you described it. Everything still works as expected, you just add a layer.
public class C {
public void test() {
System.out.println("Inside C");
}
}
public class B extends C {
public void test() {
super.test();
System.out.println("Inside B");
}
}
public class A extends B {
public static void main(String[] args) {
A obj = new A();
obj.test();
}
}
Output:
Inside C
Inside B
super means your superclass – it's resolved at compile-time.
It does not mean the immediate parent class of whatever the runtime type of this is.
Say I have a class called A, and in A there's a method called myMethod(). Now say I make a subclass of A, called SubA, and in SubA I override myMethod() to make it do what I want it to. Now say I have another method in A called myOtherMethod() which calls myMethod() (from within the same class). I do not override myOtherMethod() in SubA. If I now call myOtherMethod() from inside SubA, it will clearly run A's myOtherMethod(). But does this now call the myMethod() as defined in A, or as defined (and overridden) in SubA?
To further confuse things, does it matter at all whether myMethod() were an interface method for some interface that class A implemented?
It is easy to try - the fact that A implements an interface or not does not make a difference:
public class A {
public void myMethod() {
System.out.println("A.myMethod()");
}
public void myOtherMethod() {
System.out.println("A.myOtherMethod()");
myMethod();
}
public static class SubA extends A {
#Override
public void myMethod() {
System.out.println("SubA.myMethod()");
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
A a = new A();
SubA subA = new SubA();
a.myMethod(); //A.myMethod()
subA.myMethod(); //SubA.myMethod()
a.myOtherMethod(); //A.myOtherMethod() + A.myMethod()
subA.myOtherMethod(); //A.myOtherMethod() + SubA.myMethod()
}
}
If you create instance of SubA then calling method myOtherMethod() (which is in A) calls method myMethod() defined in SubA because it overrides method defined in A.
Let's say I have three classes A, B and C.
B extends A
C extends B
All have a public void foo() method defined.
Now from C's foo() method I want to invoke A's foo() method (NOT its parent B's method but the super super class A's method).
I tried super.super.foo();, but it's invalid syntax.
How can I achieve this?
You can't even use reflection. Something like
Class superSuperClass = this.getClass().getSuperclass().getSuperclass();
superSuperClass.getMethod("foo").invoke(this);
would lead to an InvocationTargetException, because even if you call the foo-Method on the superSuperClass, it will still use C.foo() when you specify "this" in invoke. This is a consequence from the fact that all Java methods are virtual methods.
It seems you need help from the B class (e.g. by defining a superFoo(){ super.foo(); } method).
That said, it looks like a design problem if you try something like this, so it would be helpful to give us some background: Why you need to do this?
You can't - because it would break encapsulation.
You're able to call your superclass's method because it's assumed that you know what breaks encapsulation in your own class, and avoid that... but you don't know what rules your superclass is enforcing - so you can't just bypass an implementation there.
You can't do it in a simple manner.
This is what I think you can do:
Have a bool in your class B. Now you must call B's foo from C like [super foo] but before doing this set the bool to true. Now in B's foo check if the bool is true then do not execute any steps in that and just call A's foo.
Hope this helps.
To quote a previous answer "You can't - because it would break encapsulation." to which I would like to add that:
However there is a corner case where you can,namely if the method is static (public or protected). You can not overwrite the static method.
Having a public static method is trivial to prove that you can indeed do this.
For protected however, you need from inside one of your methods to perform a cast to any superclass in the inheritance path and that superclass method would be called.
This is the corner case I am exploring in my answer:
public class A {
static protected callMe(){
System.out.println("A");
}
}
public class B extends A {
static protected callMe(){
System.out.println("B");
}
}
public class C extends B {
static protected callMe(){
System.out.println("C");
C.callMe();
}
public void accessMyParents(){
A a = (A) this;
a.callMe(); //calling beyond super class
}
}
The answer remains still No, but just wanted to show a case where you can, although it probably wouldn't make any sense and is just an exercise.
Yes you can do it. This is a hack. Try not to design your program like this.
class A
{
public void method()
{ /* Code specific to A */ }
}
class B extends A
{
#Override
public void method()
{
//compares if the calling object is of type C, if yes push the call to the A's method.
if(this.getClass().getName().compareTo("C")==0)
{
super.method();
}
else{ /*Code specific to B*/ }
}
}
class C extends B
{
#Override
public void method()
{
/* I want to use the code specific to A without using B */
super.method();
}
}
There is a workaround that solved my similar problem:
Using the class A, B, and C scenario, there is a method that will not break encapsulation nor does it require to declare class C inside of class B. The workaround is to move class B's methods into a separate but protected method.
Then, if those class B's methods are not required simply override that method but don't use 'super' within that method. Overriding and doing nothing effectively neutralises that class B method.
public class A {
protected void callMe() {
System.out.println("callMe for A");
}
}
public class B extends A {
protected void callMe() {
super.callMe();
methodsForB(); // Class B methods moved out and into it's own method
}
protected void methodsForB() {
System.out.println("methods for B");
}
}
public class C extends B {
public static void main(String[] args) {
new C().callMe();
}
protected void callMe() {
super.callMe();
System.out.println("callMe for C");
}
protected void methodsForB() {
// Do nothing thereby neutralising class B methods
}
}
The result will be:
callMe for A
callMe for C
It's not possible, we're limited to call the superclass implementations only.
I smell something fishy here.
Are you sure you are not just pushing the envelope too far "just because you should be able to do it"? Are you sure this is the best design pattern you can get? Have you tried refactoring it?
I had a problem where a superclass would call an top class method that was overridden.
This was my workaround...
//THIS WOULD FAIL CALLING SUPERCLASS METHODS AS a1() would invoke top class METHOD
class foo1{
public void a1(){
a2();
}
public void a2(){}
}
class foo2 extends foo1{
{
public void a1(){
//some other stuff
super.a1();
}
public void a2(){
//some other stuff
super.a2();
}
//THIS ENSURES THE RIGHT SUPERCLASS METHODS ARE CALLED
//the public methods only call private methods so all public methods can be overridden without effecting the superclass's functionality.
class foo1{
public void a1(){
a3();}
public void a2(){
a3();}
private void a3(){
//super class routine
}
class foo2 extends foo1{
{
public void a1(){
//some other stuff
super.a1();
}
public void a2(){
//some other stuff
super.a2();
}
I hope this helps.
:)
Before using reflection API think about the cost of it.
It is simply easy to do. For instance:
C subclass of B and B subclass of A. Both of three have method methodName() for example.
public abstract class A {
public void methodName() {
System.out.println("Class A");
}
}
public class B extends A {
public void methodName() {
super.methodName();
System.out.println("Class B");
}
// Will call the super methodName
public void hackSuper() {
super.methodName();
}
}
public class C extends B {
public static void main(String[] args) {
A a = new C();
a.methodName();
}
#Override
public void methodName() {
/*super.methodName();*/
hackSuper();
System.out.println("Class C");
}
}
Run class C Output will be:
Class A
Class C
Instead of output:
Class A
Class B
Class C
In my simple case I had to inherit B and C from abstract class, that incapsulates equal methods of B and C. So that
A
|
Abstr
/ \
B C
While it doesn't solve the problem, it can be used in simple cases, when C is similar to B. For instance, when C is initialized, but doesn't want to use initializers of B. Then it simply calls Abstr methods.
This is a common part of B and C:
public abstract class Abstr extends AppCompatActivity {
public void showProgress() {
}
public void hideProgress() {
}
}
This is B, that has it's own method onCreate(), which exists in AppCompatActivity:
public class B extends Abstr {
#Override
public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState); // Call from AppCompatActivity.
setContentView(R.layout.activity_B); // B shows "activity_B" resource.
showProgress();
}
}
C shows its own layout:
public class C extends Abstr {
#Override
public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState); // Call from AppCompatActivity.
setContentView(R.layout.activity_C); // C shows "activity_C" resource.
showProgress();
}
}
This is not something that you should do normally but, in special cases where you have to workaround some bug from a third party library (if it allow to do so), you can achieve calling a super super class method that has already been overwritten using the delegation pattern and an inner class that extends the super super class to use as a bridge:
class A() {
public void foo() {
System.out.println("calling A");
}
}
class B extends A() {
#Overwrite
public void foo() {
System.out.println("calling B");
}
}
class C extends B() {
private final a;
public C() {
this.a = new AExtension();
}
#Overwrite
public void foo() {
a.foo();
}
private class AExtension extends A {
}
}
This way you will be able to not only call the super super method but also combine calls to other super super class methods with calls to methods of the super class or the class itself by using `C.super` or `C.this`.