Develop Reference

Abstract method with different parameters Java

public abstract class CommonClass {
abstract void send(<what should i put here???>) {}
}
public class ClassA extends CommonClass {
void send(List<Comments> commentsList) {
// do stuff
}
}
public class ClassB extends CommonClass {
void send(List<Post> postList) {
// do stuff
}
}
I am new to OODP, I am trying to have a method that is able to take in any kind of List data so that I can abstract things out. How can i do this?

You could make it generic on some type T. Like,
public abstract class CommonClass<T> {
abstract void send(List<T> al);
}
And then, to implement it - use the generic. Like,
public class ClassA extends CommonClass<Comments> {
#Override
void send(List<Comments> commentsList) {
// do stuff
}
}
public class ClassB extends CommonClass<Post> {
#Override
void send(List<Post> postList) {
// do stuff
}
}
Also, as discussed in the comments, your class names could be improved to be more intuitive; something like,
public abstract class AbstractSender<T> {
abstract void send(List<T> al);
}
and then
public class CommentSender extends AbstractSender<Comment> {
#Override
void send(List<Comment> commentsList) {
// do stuff
}
}
public class PostSender extends AbstractSender<Post> {
#Override
void send(List<Post> postList) {
// do stuff
}
}
That has the advantage(s) of being more readable and easier to reason about (I can tell what a PostSender does by reading the name, ClassB not so much).
Finally, this looks like a case where an interface would work since your abstract class is purely virtual (and should be preferred since you can implement multiple interface, but can only extend from a single parent class);
public interface ISender<T> {
void send(List<T> al);
}
public class CommentSender implements ISender<Comment> {
#Override
void send(List<Comment> commentsList) {
// do stuff
}
}
public class PostSender implements ISender<Post> {
#Override
void send(List<Post> postList) {
// do stuff
}
}

In order to achieve this, you can take multiple approaches, I would suggest looking into Generics: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/generics/index.html
With that said, there is one approach that is the most elegant and simple: you can supply a List<T> where T is a generic type.
public abstract class CommonClass<T> {
abstract void send(List<T>) {}
}
public class ClassA extends CommonClass<Comment> {
void send(List<Comments> commentsList) {
// do stuff
}
}
public class ClassB extends CommonClass<Post> {
void send(List<Post> postList) {
// do stuff
}
}

You can do that with the help of generics. https://www.tutorialspoint.com/java/java_generics.htm
Example
The abstract class
public abstract class CommonClass {
public abstract <T> void send(List<T> data);
}
Its child
public class Child extends CommonClass {
public <T> void send(List<T> data) {
// code here
}
}
Retrieving the list's contents
Retrieving the generified list's contents is similar to retrieving any list's contents. In the scope of the method, "T" is a type of object contained in the list.
for (T t : data) {
// to check if t is a string
if (t instanceof String) {
// code
}
}
You can also use lambdas to retrieve every element in the list.

Generics specific interface definition in Java

Is it possible to define following in Java:
public interface IGenericRepo<T> {
void add();
void delete();
void attach();
}
public interface IGenericRepo<Book> {
default String bookSpecificMethod(){
return "smthn";
}
}
public class NHGenericRepo<T> implements IGenericRepo<T>{
/* implementation */
}
public class NHUnitOfWork implements UnitOfWork{
#Autowired
public void setBookRepo(NHGenericRepo<Book> bookRepo) {
this.bookRepo= bookRepo;
}
public NHGenericRepo<Book> getBookRepo() {
return bookRepo;
}
private NHGenericRepo<Book> bookRepo;
}
And to be able somewhere in code to have:
{
#Autowired
public void setNhuw(NHUnitOfWork nhuw) {
this.nhuw = nhuw;
}
private NHUnitOfWork nhuw;
/**/
{
String st = this.nhuw.getBookRepo().bookSpecificMethod();
}
}
In .net this is possible by using Extension Method with "this IGenericRepo<Book>" as a first method parameter.

The closest you can come is:
public interface IBookGenericRepo extends IGenericRepo<Book> {
void BookSpecificMethod();
}

Can not cast class to generics in java

Please help resolve an issue regarding generics. I tried many ways but it's still not working.
Problem is:
public static void main(String[] args) {
Utils.execute(new TestAction(), new TestCallBack());
}
Compiler show error:
The method execute(Action<?>, CallBack<?,Action<?>>) in the type Utils is not applicable for the arguments (ImplementClass.TestAction, ImplementClass.TestCallBack)
My classes is:
Action class:
public abstract class Action<R> {
public R getResult() {
return null;
}
}
TestAction class is:
class TestAction extends Action<String> {
#Override
public String getResult() {
return super.getResult();
}
}
Callback class is:
public interface CallBack<R, A extends Action<R>> {
public void onCall(A action);}
TestCallback class is:
class TestCallBack implements CallBack<String, TestAction> {
#Override
public void onCall(TestAction action) {
}
}
And Utils class is:
public class Utils {
public static void execute(Action<?> action, CallBack<?, Action<?>> callback) {
}
}
Thanks a lot.

The second parameter of the execute method is CallBack<?, Action<?>>, and Action there means the Action class itself, subclass of it is not allowed. What you need there is - ? extends Action<?>, which means either Action or some subclass of it.
Try changing the method signature -
public static void execute(Action<?> action, CallBack<?, ? extends Action<?>> callback) {
Note:
Generics are not co-variant. Take for example a method as follows -
static void method(List<Object> l) {}
And an invocation as follows is not allowed -
method(new ArrayList<String>());

You need to change two things,
TestCallBack should be like this -
public static class TestCallBack implements CallBack<String, Action<String>> {
#Override
public void onCall(Action<String> action) {
}
}
and, Utils should be like this -
public static class Utils {
// You need to ensure the same type, not just try and accept anything.
public static <T> void execute(Action<T> action, CallBack<?, Action<T>> callback) {
}
}
or using inner classes of a class called Question -
public abstract class Action<R> {
public R getResult() {
return null;
}
}
public class TestAction extends Action<String> {
#Override
public String getResult() {
return super.getResult();
}
}
public interface CallBack<R, A extends Action<R>> {
public void onCall(A action);
}
public class TestCallBack implements CallBack<String, TestAction> {
#Override
public void onCall(TestAction action) {
}
}
public class Utils {
public void execute(Action<?> action, CallBack<?, ? extends Action<?>> callback) {
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Question question = new Question();
question.new Utils().execute(question.new TestAction(), question.new TestCallBack());
}

List<Structure> in java

How I can instantiate a object in the List e.g
i like to search for begin in the file , if it finds then add the store the code after it. here is the example
public abstract class Structure
{
private List<Structure> structureList = new ArrayList<Structure>();
protected void setStructure(Filemanager file, String line)
{
/*
* set all values at the object structure
*/
line = file.getSourceLine();
while (!line.contains("END_"))
{
if (line.contains("TRANSLATE"))
{
}
else if (line.contains("BEGIN_OBJECT"))
{
structureList.add(new FunctionalStructure(line));
}
else
{
setValue(line);
}
line = file.getSourceLine();
}
}
protected abstract void setValue(String line);
}
public abstract class FunctionalStructure extends Structure
{
private String name;
public FunctionalStructure(String line)
{
super();
this.name = line.substring(line.indexOf("\"")+1, line.lastIndexOf("\""));
}
public String getName()
{
return this.name;
}
public List<Structure> Startfunctional()
{
return null;
}
protected abstract void setValue(String line);
}
I have problem in in instantiate structureList.add(new FunctionalStructure(line));
Can anyone please tell what is wrong in the above line

I think that FunctionalStructure must be an abstract class (which presumably extends Structure). You cannot instantiate an abstract class.
This is why you get the error like:
Cannot instantiate the type FunctionalStructure
If you created the FunctionalStructure class, perhaps you accidentally marked it as abstract. Assuming it implements the setValue(String) method, you could remove the abstract modifier from the class declaration.
Alternatively, use a suitable concrete class extending FunctionalStructure in the API you are using.
Alternatively, use an anonymous inner class:
structureList.add(new FunctionalStructure(line){
public void setValue(String value) {
// your implementation here
}
});

you might find example below helpful to understand the concept :-
package pack;
public class Demo {
public static void main(String[] args) {
MyGeneric<A> obj = new MyGeneric<A>() ;
//obj.add(new C()) ; //don't compile
obj.testMethod(new A()) ; //fine
obj.testMethod(new B()) ; //fine
}
}
class A{}
class C{}
class B extends A{}
class MyGeneric<T>{
public void testMethod(T t) {
}
}
EDIT : So, there must be a IS-A relation between Structure and FunctionalStructure to successfully compile the code.

Correct usage of "<T extends SuperClass>"

I am not familiar with "Generics". Is it a correct use of "<T extends SuperClass>" ? And do you agree that the codes after using generics are better?
Before using Generics
=================================================
public abstract class SuperSample {
public void getSomething(boolean isProcessA) {
doProcessX();
if(isProcessA){
doProcessY(new SubASample());
}else{
doProcessY(new SubBSample());
}
}
protected abstract void doProcessX();
protected void doProcessY(SubASample subASample) {
// Nothing to do
}
protected void doProcessY(SubBSample subBSample) {
// Nothing to do
}
}
public class SubASample extends SuperSample {
#Override
protected void doProcessX() {
System.out.println("doProcessX in SubASample");
}
#Override
protected void doProcessY(SubASample subASample) {
System.out.println("doProcessY in SubASample");
}
}
public class Sample {
public static void main(String[] args) {
SubASample subASample = new SubASample();
subASample.getSomething(true);
}
}
After using Generics
=================================================
public abstract class SuperSample {
public void getSomething(boolean isProcessA) {
doProcessX();
if(isProcessA){
doProcessY(new SubASample());
}else{
doProcessY(new SubBSample());
}
}
protected abstract void doProcessX();
protected abstract <T extends SuperSample> void doProcessY(T subSample);
}
public class SubASample extends SuperSample {
#Override
protected void doProcessX() {
System.out.println("doProcessX in SubASample");
}
#Override
protected <T extends SuperSample> void doProcessY(T subSample) {
System.out.println("doProcessY in SubASample");
}
}
public class Sample {
public static void main(String[] args) {
SubASample subASample = new SubASample();
subASample.getSomething(true);
}
}

If you want to do what I think you want to do, I don't think that this is the right way (*). If you want that every subclass needs to implement a method that processes it's own type, then you can use the CRTP trick:
abstract class Super<S extends Super<S>> {
abstract void process(S s);
}
class SubA extends Super<SubA> {
void process(SubA s){ /* do something */ }
}
class SubB extends Super<SubB> {
void process(SubB s){ /* do something */ }
}
Note that this pattern enforces the generic signature of the subclasses, e.g. class SubA extends Super<SubB> wouldn't compile.
Java itself uses that trick in java.lang.Enum, by the way.
(*)If this is not the behavior you want to enforce, please clarify.

it's correct to use . It means that you restrict type T to be subclass of SuperSample. And for second answer, yes I think code with generecis is better because it keeps you from wrong casting of classes for example with containers (List ...). But in fact generics in Java are only syntax suger and so they are erased during runtime.