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
Related
I have an identical method that is repeated in every subclass and I'd like to refactor it to just one method in a superclass.
public class SubClass1 extends SuperClass {
private BoltHexHead bolt;
private void computeFoo() {
//Foo formula is identical in all subclasses. Need to move up
setFoo(bolt.getDiameter() + bolt.getPitch() + bolt.getTpi());
}
private void computeBar() {
//computeBar method in all subclasses but Bar formula is different amongst all subclasses
setBar(bolt.getDiameter() - 2*bolt.getPitch() - 3*bolt.getTpi());
}
private void computeSeparation() {
//computeSeparation method only exists for a Subclass 1
setSeparation(bolt.getLength() - 2*nut.getFlatDia());
}
public class SubClass2 extends SuperClass {
private BoltFlatHead bolt;
private void computeFoo() {
//Foo formula is identical in all subclasses. Need to move up
setFoo(bolt.getDiameter() + bolt.getPitch() + bolt.getTpi());
}
private void computeBar() {
//computeBar method here is different than in Subclass1
setBar(bolt.getDiameter() - 4*bolt.getPitch() - 1/3*bolt.getTpi());
}
private void computeProtrusion() {
//computeProtrusionmethod only exists for a Subclass 2
setProtrusionmethod(bolt.getThreadAngle() - 6*bolt.getTpi());
}
Initially I posted that bolt wasn't getting set in the SuperClass but was in the SubClass. What I got working after my initial post was the following
public abstract class SuperClass {
protected Bolt<?> bolt; <-- this was added but uses wildcard
...bolt getters/setter
protected void computeFoo() {
//Foo formula pulled up from all subclasses
setFoo(bolt.getDiameter() + bolt.getPitch() + bolt.getTpi());
}
}
public class SubClass1 extends SuperClass {
//private BoltHexHead bolt; <-- commented this out in each subclass
}
This is a JSF app and in each controller bean I instantiate the specific joint attribute subclass and then set the specific bolt. It was an earlier design decision to use setters for setting the bolt (and other properties) in the subclass rather than doing it with the Constructor; but one refactor at a time.
Controller for a Bolt Analysis using a HexHead Bolt
private SubClass1 sc1 = new SubClass1();
private BoltHexHead bolt;
sc1.setBolt(bolt);
sc1.computeResults();
Controller for a Bolt Analysis using a FlatHead Bolt
private SubClass2 sc2 = new SubClass2();
private BoltFlatHead bolt;
sc2.setBolt(bolt);
sc1.computeResults();
So my question is, is it OK to use wildcard Bolt<?> bolt or is there a better approach?
I'm just trying to put a identical/duplicate method from all my subclasses into the parent but one of the variables (bolt) isn't getting set
Thats because in java you cannot override fields.
So your variables "private B bolt;" in your superclass and "private BoltHexHead bolt;" in your subclass are two different things. They actually both exist at the same time.
What you are trying to do actually isn't that complicated. You just need to clean up your code:
Only define "private B bolt;" and its setters/getters once in your superclass.
Only use those getters/setters to access bolt
If you want your subclass to have a "bolt" of the type "BoltHexHead" then define the generic parameter as such in the class definition ("extends JointAttribute<BoltHexHead>" instead of "extends JointAttribute<Bolt<BoltSpec>>")
A simple example for demonstration purspose:
Superclass:
public class Superclass<T> {
private T value;
protected T getValue() {
return value;
}
protected void setValue(T value) {
this.value = value;
}
protected void print() {
if(getValue()==null) {
System.out.println("NULL");
} else {
System.out.println(getValue().toString());
}
}
}
Subclass1:
public class Subclass extends Superclass<String> {
public Subclass() {
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Subclass subclass= new Subclass();
subclass.print();
subclass.setValue("test");
subclass.print();
}
}
Subclass2:
public class Subclass2 extends Superclass<Integer> {
public Subclass2() {
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Subclass2 subclass= new Subclass2();
subclass.print();
subclass.setValue(3);
subclass.print();
}
}
I am a newbie. So, I couldn't find the exact words to explain what I want to do. I will try to explain.
I created a class that extends some base class. In the base class I have some methods using the object specific information to run. I mean that we defined with a constructor.
So, in the class that extends my base class, I created a constructor with super, can I call some base class method in constructor in order to run automatically after object creation.
Like that:
class Base {
String someInfo;
Base(String someInfo) {
this.someInfo = someInfo;
}
String someMethod() {
return someInfo;
}
}
class MClass extends Base {
MClass(String someInfo) {
super(someInfo);
someMethod();
}
}
Your question is more about theory, not practice.
In practice - you can. But you shouldn't do such things. It's about code smell and possibility for hard-to-find bugs. Look at this sample
class Base {
private final String t;
private final int length;
Base(String t) {
this.t = t;
length = this.t.length();// here you'll got NullPointerException
}
}
class Override {
Override() {
super(calculate());
}
String calculate() {
return "Override";
}
}
class OverrideB {
private final String b = "some string";
OverrideB() {
}
String calculate() {
return b;
}
}
In current sample when you'll try to create OverrideB instance you'll got NullPointerException - because b isn't instantiated at current moment (you can check it by yourself - it is about order of constructors calls).
But you have to options to avoid this problem:
private methods (they cannot be overridden, only hidden in sub classes)
final methods (same case as for private, but they can't be even hidden and they available for all subclasses)
PS according to class names conventions you should name your mClass as MClass.
I have a nested (static) class with a private field and a setter method for this field.
public class Outer{
private static class Inner{ // List node
private String fieldA;
// ...other members...
public void setA(String fieldA)
{
//.. do importent stuff before setting fieldA
this.fieldA = fieldA;
}
}
}
Now we had a bug because the fieldA is accessed directly (and not by setter method setA) by Outer class although the field fieldA is private. How can I enforce developers to use the setter method instead of directly accessing the field?
I have read the related topic Access modifiers inside a private static nested class in Java that states that it is by design. But is there a workaround to ensure using setter method by outer class?
If the class must not be moved to outside of Outer, you should define an interface for Inner and use only that. If you have only few instances and this is not a performance critical point of your application, you could just create anonymous implementations of that interface. The class isn't static anymore but at least it's a short and readable solution.
private static interface Inner {
void setA(String a);
}
private static Inner createInner() {
return new Inner() {
private String a;
#Override
public void setA(String a) {
this.a = a;
}
};
}
If you want to keep the class static, I don't see many options to hide anything from the outer class. You can try to make it more obvious that the inner class should be used carefully.
It looks a bit strange, but you could move the implementation into the interface like in the following example - that doesn't really prevent anyone from using Inner.InnerImpl, but it should imply that the class InnerImpl belongs to Inner and is not be used directly.
public class Outer{
private static interface Inner {
static class InnerImpl implements Inner {
private String a;
#Override
public void setA(String a) {
this.a = a;
}
}
void setA(String a);
}
// either instantiate directly or again wrap it in a `createInner()` method
// Inner inner = new Inner.InnerImpl();
}
Actually here is another quite simple option. I think for this special case you could justify introducing a new naming convention to avoid accidental use of properties.
private static class Inner {
private String _a;
public void setA(String a) {
this._a = a;
}
}
Is it possible to access a child class constant from within a static method in the parent class?
public class Model {
public static void someMethod(){
HERE I WANT TO GET THE MODEL_NAME constant!
}
}
public class EventModel extends Model {
public static final String MODEL_NAME = "events";
}
and in some other place I call:
EventModel.someMethod();
Try it!
If the constant is declared private, then no. If it is public, then yes, as anyone can access it. The parent class is largely irrelevent here.
class Parent {
public static void Foo() {
int x = Child.YEP; // Ok
int y = Child.NOPE; // Error
}
}
class Child extends Parent {
public static final int YEP = 42;
private static final int NOPE = 66;
}
Foo is defined in Parent, and thus cannot access private members of Child.
How about this?
class Parent {
abstract String getModelName();
public void someMethod() {
String myModel = getModelName();
}
}
class Child extend Parent {
String getModelName() { return "events"; }
}
Note however, that the method is no longer public.
You might find this more effective.
Define your parent class with a method getName. Note that this can be public, if you want your model class to expose a Name property, otherwise, you can keep it as "protected" as I have here. "Protected" will keep the method visible within this class, and any derived (child) classes.
public class Model {
private static String MODEL_NAME = "Model";
protected String getModelName(){
return MODEL_NAME;
}
}
Then define an "override" for the name method on your child class:
public class EventModel extends Model
{
private static String MODEL_NAME = "events";
#Override // Tells the compiler that this method OVERRIDES the parent method
public String getModelName(){
return MODEL_NAME;
}
}
This compiles and runs the way I suspect you are trying to acheive . . .
EDIT: Oooh. NOW I see the problem. Missed that you needed to reference that from a static method . . .
A friend of mine was asked that question in his on-phone job interview a couple of days a go.
I don't have a clue. can anyone suggest a solution?
(His job interview is over. just out of curiosity now )
10x.
Mark constructor as private
Provide a static method on the class to create instance of a class. This will allow you to instantiate objects of that class
I don't know what they mean exactly mean by a final class. If they mean a class that cannot be extended by inheritence, than clearly this cannot be done, except by marking that class with final (or sealed, or whatever the language keyword is).
But if the mean final as in immutable, such that a derived class can't modify the value of the fields in the class,than the base class should have all of the fileds and accessor methods private.
Create a private constructor without parameters?
public class Base
{
private Base()
{
}
}
public class Derived : Base
{
//Cannot access private constructor here error
}
Make all the constructors of that class as private to stop inheriting, Though not recommended.
public class Immutable {
private int val;
public Immutable(int v)
{
this.val = v;
}
public int getVal() { return this.val; }
}
You can make your class immutable without using final keyword as:
Make instance variable as private.
Make constructor private.
Create a factory method which will return the instance of this class.
I am providing immutable class here in Java.
class Immutable {
private int i;
private Immutable(int i){
this.i = i;
}
public static Immutable createInstance(int i){
return new Immutable(i);
}
public int getI(){return i;}
}
class Main {
public static void main(string args[]){
Immutable obj = Immutable.createInstance(5);
}
}
Static classes can't be inherited from