Generic ADT / Interface to implementation

Hello, I'm new to java, hope anyone can help.
I have to implement a priority queue that should meet the following interface (note: please ignore the '>' after 'Comparable'):
public interface PriorityQueue<E extends Comparable<E>> {
    boolean offer(E o);
    E poll();
    E peek();
    boolean isEmpty();
}I'm having problems with the offer(E o) method... I wrote this:
public class ListPriorityQueue<E extends Comparable<E>> implements PriorityQueue {
public boolean offer(E o) { return false; }
}I thought it would work, but Eclipse gives me the following error on that line:
"Name clash: the method offer(E) of type ListPriorityQueue<E> has the same erasure has offer(E) of type PriorityQueue but does not override it"
It also gives me this error at class level:
"The type ListPriorityQueue<E> must implement the inherited abstract method PriorityQueue.offer(Comparable)"
What should I do?

"Name clash: the method offer(E) of type
ListPriorityQueue<E> has the same erasure has
offer(E) of type PriorityQueue but does not override
it"
implements PriorityQueue<E>>
It also gives me this error at class level:
"The type ListPriorityQueue<E> must implement
the inherited abstract method
PriorityQueue.offer(Comparable)"
What should I do?You have to either implement all the methods declared in the interface, or declare your class as abstract.

Similar Messages

  • How to define generics in interfaces

    I want to define an interface for Person, which has 2 attributes, 'Owner' and 'Access', but these attributes may be different types for different implementations of the interface. I have another interface that takes Person, so I have something like this:
    public interface Person<O, A>
        public abstract O getOwner();
        public A getAccess();
    public interface Entry
        public void addPerson(Person<?, ?> person);
    }I then have a base Entry implementation that does
    import java.util.ArrayList;
    import java.util.List;
    public abstract class BaseEntry implements Entry
        protected List<Person<?,?>>  persons;
        public void addPerson(Person<?, ?> person)
            if (persons == null)
                persons = new ArrayList<Person<?,?>>();
            persons.add(person);
    }and finally I have a concrete class that wants to use Entry and Person interfaces to do somthing like
    public class RealEntry extends BaseEntry
        private int personCount;
        public void addPerson(Person<String, String> person)
            super.addPerson(person);
            personCount++;
    }and I might have another implementation that does
    public class ListEntry extends BaseEntry
        public void addPerson(Person<String, List<String>> person)
            super.addPerson(person);
    }but the concrete implementations do not compile in Eclipse with the message
    Name clash: The method addPerson(Person<String,String>) of type RealEntry has the same erasure as addPerson(Person<?,?>) of type BaseEntry but does not override it
    I've read the generics tutorial, but it's not helped me. I'm not absolutely certain I should be using wildcards as opposed to generic method.
    Anyone know what I'm doing wrong?
    Thanks
    Antony

    Hi Stefan, I see how your example breaks things, thanks.
    My 'Entry' is a simple queue class. I compiles OK if I add the O, A to Entry and implementations, i.e.
    public interface Entry<O, A>
        public void addPerson(Person<O, A> person);
    }but it seems strange (to me) that I have to define the O, A types for the Entry interface - it makes it cluttered. I thought it should be possible to have a generic Entry interface that takes a Person objects without having to tell Entry the subtypes of classes that make up the O and A inside Person.
    I could be trying to do something impossible, but I something think it has to be possible as it seems such a common type of usage, i.e. I can have many classes that all define different types of Person implementations and can store them in Entry implementations.

  • Generics in Interfaces ?

    Hi all,
    Just a quick question about using generics in interfaces...is it possible to specify a type parameter for an abstract method, which is then made concrete in the implementing class ?
    One example is the Comparable interface...it would be nice if, instead of using the "Object" type, you could specify that the parameter type for the method should be that of the implementing class. This would get rid of the compareTo(Object o) methods which can present a run-time problem.
    Thanks,
    Michael Dodsworth.

    Hi again,
    As part of a wider question...is it possible to specify the type parameter of a class/interface (as you would in a new statement) as part of an "extends/implements..." statement:
    public class Foo
    extends Hashtable<Integer, String>{
    (the Hashtable example is from http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-djc02113.html)
    All type parameters on Hashtable are then tied to Integer and String in the extending class; all inherited methods have the signatures of that particular incarnation of Hashtable.
    Answering this, then answers the above question.
    Thanks,
    Michael Dodsworth.

  • Tutorial for make a non-generic type class from a generic type interface

    Hi there,
    How can I make a non-generic type class from a generic type interface?
    I appreciate if somebody let me know which site can help me.
    Regards
    Maurice

    I have a generic interface with this signature
    public interface IELO<K extends IMetadataKey>
    and I have implemented a class from it
    public class CmsELOImpl<K extends IMetadataKey> implements IELO<K>, Cloneable, Serializable
    then I have to pass class of an instance CmsELOImpl to AbstractJcrDAO class constructor whit below signature
    public abstract class AbstractJcrDAO<T> implements JcrDAO<T> {
    public AbstractJcrDAO( Class<T> entityClass, Session session, Jcrom jcrom ) {
              this(entityClass, session, jcrom, new String[0]);
    So I have made another class extended from AbstractJcrDAO. Below shows the code of this class and itd constructor
    public class ELODaoImpl extends AbstractJcrDAO<CmsELOImpl<IMetadataKey>> {
         public ELODaoImpl( Session session, Jcrom jcrom ) {
         super(CmsELOImpl.class , session , jcrom, MIXIN_TYPES);
    and as you see in its constructor I am calling the AbstractJcrDAO constructor by supper method
    then I got this error on the line of super method
    The constructor AbstractJcrDAO(class<CmsELOImpl>, session, Jcrom, String[]) is undefined.
    as I know java generics are implemented using type erasure. This generics are only
    in the java source file and not in the class files. The generics are only used by the compiler and
    they are erased from the class files. This is done to make generics compatible with (old) non generics java code.
    As a result the class object of AbstractJcrDAO<CmsELOImpl<IMetadataKey>>
    is AbstractJcrDAO.class. The <CmsELOImpl<IMetadataKey>> information is
    not available in the class file. As far as I understand it, I am looking a way
    to pass <CmsELOImpl<IMetadataKey>>, if it is possible at all.
    Maurice

  • Best practice for Javadoc comments in both an interface and implementation

    For the Spring project I'm writing, I have interfaces with typically 1 implementation class associated with it. This is for various good reasons. So I'm trying to be very thorough with my Javadoc comments, but I realize I'm basically copying them over from interface to implementation class. Shouldn't Javadoc have a setting or be smart enough to grab the comments from my interface if the implementation class doesn't have a comment? Unless of course there is interesting information about the implementation, it's rare the 2 sets of comments would be different.

    Thanks Thomas!! Exactly what I was looking for. Here's the JavaSE 6 version of the page you provided:
    http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/technotes/tools/windows/javadoc.html#inheritingcomments

  • Regarding Interface methods implementation

    Hi,
    I have a interface with 3 methods.
    public interface test{
    public void A();
    public void B();
    public void C();
    public class IntImpl implements test{
    public void B(){
    //implementation
    Can we implement an interface with out implementing all the methods of interface .instead implementing a few methods in the interface?
    i came to know that we can do the above one with out any exceptions? So any of you can resolve this issue ..
    Thanks in advance
    Sri

    Can we implement an interface with out implementing
    all the methods of interface .instead implementing a
    few methods in the interface?In other words: can we implement an interface without implementing it?
    The answer should be obvious.
    i came to know that we can do the above one with out
    any exceptions? Sure, it's quite easy, you already did it. The stuff above won't compile, hence it won't throw an exception when running.
    Or you can also avoid compiler errors by declaring IntImpl as abstract. Which means you didn't implement the interface though.

  • Pattern b/w Remote interface & Container implementation  class

    Which pattern is followed by EJB Remote interface & Container implementation class of that interface?Is there anyting mentioned in specs?
    This questoin was asked to me by many people.I think it is Command design pattern as it hides away all the details of actual business implementation.but at same time I doubt if it is Facade?
    Anyone who knows about this?
    Thanx in advance
    Sidhu

    Rarely is software represent a single pattern, it typically represents multiple patterns.
    Which pattern is followed by EJB Remote interfaceThe remote interface is an example of a facade pattern. This presents a public interface which is an abstraction of the real interface.
    Container implementation class of that interface? The implementation is an example of what I think of as a double proxy pattern. That is acting as two distinct proxies. The first being the the remote callingof EJB standard functions via the Skelton implementation. I.E. The underlying EJB/RMI interface. The Second being a application level proxying of the business logic seen in most RL implementation.
    The use of an UID ID beans is an example of a memento.
    I think it is Command design pattern as it hides away all the
    details of actual business implementation.Not directly, though an AppServer programmer may use the Command Pattern to resolve the remote connections. The User Application Programmer may also use this pattern. The key element of Command Pattern is the Invoker executing an concrete class via abstraction or interface of a polymorphic class. You can think of this as a specialisation of the
    Martin

  • Interface Re-Implementation on Windows Runtime

    Hey Guys,
    I just noticed a weird behavior while trying to compile some code. I just wanted to ask if I am missing something or interface re-implementation is not allowed on Windows Runtime.
    So a simple example:
    public interface IMyInterface
    void MyFirstMethod();
    void MySecondMethod();
    public class MyFirstClass : IMyInterface
    void IMyInterface.MyFirstMethod()
    // TODO:
    void IMyInterface.MySecondMethod()
    // TODO:
    public class MySecondClass : MyFirstClass, IMyInterface
    void IMyInterface.MyFirstMethod()
    // TODO: something else
    This would at worst case scenario would give a compiler error but would compile (I think) on a .net application. (see
    http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ericlippert/archive/2011/12/08/so-many-interfaces-part-two.aspx  and )
    Is compilation different on windows runtime? Anybody faced the same issue?
    Thanks in advance...
    Can Bilgin
    Blog
    Samples CompuSight

    Hi Can,
    As a guidance/rule any public class in a WinRT component that we develop should be sealed as otherwise one will start extending unmanaged code in managed code. Same guidance should be applicable to anything that is given by Microsoft (controls in this
    case, which are part of namespace Windows.UI.Xaml in Windows.winmd).
    For immediate resolution I will suggest you create a Windows Runtime component and in that you extend any WinRT control to do what you are trying. I think that will fix your immediate issue, if that does not work then it is truly a bug. 
    For why those controls are not sealed I can understand and think that there is a need of a new keyword in C# to mark classes open to extend as WinRT component i.e. unmanaged but sealed for just .NET managed code :)
    -- Vishal Kaushik --
    Please 'Mark as Answer' if my post answers your question and 'Vote as Helpful'
    if it helps you. Happy Coding!!!
    My Samples
    My Codeplex Project

  • Generics in interfaces parameters

    My post is a feature request. If anyone have informations on forthcoming and related developments, please send me.
    I want to implement a graph class with nodes and edges collections and express in the implements section that this class supports such features (I don't take into account any delegation mechanism), graph can be considered as a String / Node map or as String / Edge one :
    public class Graph implements Map<String, Node>, Map<String, Edge> {
    but when compiling, I have interfaces method conflicts such as :
    "The return type is incompatible with Map<String,Edge>.get(Object), Map<String,Node>.get(Object)"
    because one get(Object) method is present in each interface. I would have rather liked to have a get(Node) and a get(Edge) methods. In other words, I would have liked to have Map<K,V>.get(K) method in Map interface.
    Does anyone know why Java Generics are not fully introduced in interfaces and maybe in some classes ? Is it a technical reason ? A workaround ? An intermediate development stage ?
    Thx.

    public class Graph implements Map<String, Node>, Map<String, Edge> {The problem is that after compilation, when the object code is produced, any "type parameter" information is erased (you need to read up on Java reflection more closely).
    Thus, there is only one Map class in the runtime (not one for every possible combination of type parameters). and any references to, say, Map<String,Node>.put() become, at runtime, just Map.put().
    So you can't do what you want, because at compile time, your two parent interfaces are "different", but at runtime, they would be the same. The message could be better, I agree.
    To do what you want:
    * If your two classes (Edge and Node) have no relationship to each other, then you'll have to implement Map<String,Object>.
    * If they do have a common ancestor, you can declare it as extending Map<String,CommonAncestor>.
    In both cases, you'll have to, e.g. downcast the result of get() to the right type.

  • ClassCastException at Remote object although remote interface is implemented

    Hi,
    I want to access a remote object via T3 (on WebLogic 10) but I am
    getting a ClassCastException in the client. The exception is thrown if
    the generic "Remote" object is casted into a concrete remote interface.
    The following works ok (client side, get remote object via JNDI):
    Hashtable hashTable = new Hashtable();
    hashTable.put(Context.INITIAL_CONTEXT_FACTORY,
    "weblogic.jndi.WLInitialContextFactory");
    hashTable.put(Context.PROVIDER_URL, "t3://localhost:7001);
    ic = new InitialContext(hashTable);
    Remote r = (Remote) ic.lookup("...jndi bind name...");
    But this cast fails:
    IMyRemoteIntf i = (IMintRemoteIntf) r;
    The ClassCastException has the classname of the class which implements
    the remote interface - the lookup should be ok therefore. With
    r.getClass().getInterfaces() I have verified that the remote object
    actually implements the appropriate interface. I suppose it is a class
    loader issue then and added some debug output.
    Class loader parent chain of IMyRemoteIntf:
    weblogic.utils.classloaders.ChangeAwareClassLoader@1715ee2
    -> weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader@123ade0
    -> weblogic.utils.classloaders.FilteringClassLoader@1312cf9
    -> weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader@159ea8e
    -> java.net.URLClassLoader@82d37
    -> sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader@e39a3e
    -> sun.misc.Launcher$ExtClassLoader@a39137
    Class loader parent chain of IMyRemoteIntf as reported by r.getInterfaces():
    sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader@e39a3e
    -> sun.misc.Launcher$ExtClassLoader@a39137
    IMyRemoteIntf is in a jar file in WEB-INF/lib of my web application. I
    tried prefer-web-inf-classes = true in weblogic.xml as well as
    prefer-application-packages in weblogic-application.xml (with the
    respective package of the interface).
    Any ideas? I don't know what more I can try. I can access the same
    server with this t3 URL just fine from outside of the WebLogic server.
    Regards
    Werner

    I meant an issue about multi-connections. Although the socket is shared by all of the connections, each connection in RMI might correspond to a separated thread, I guess. Since the socket is shared by all rmi clients, the RMI channel would be a blocking connection. I am not sure if the RMI in JDK1.4 or above also use the nonblocking new I/O technique. Thanks.

  • Interface method implementation

    While Implementing a method gety() i am getting follwing error -
    gety() in class B cannot implement gety() I ;attempting to assign weaker access privilees; was public
    class B extends A implements I {
    int i;
    public B(int a,int b) {
    int q = super.i;
    System.out.println(q);
    i = b;
    void show() {
    System.out.println(X);
    System.out.println("i in subclass:" +i);
    void gety() {
    System.out.println("my");
    interface I {
    public static final int X=3;
    abstract void gety();
    }

    If interface I says gety is public, then code that
    uses an I expects it to have a public gety method.
    Since B "is-a" I (by virtue of the fact that it
    implements I), it has to do everything I promisesto
    do.Nice class names... it makes it sound like you just
    have really bad grammar :)Just following what the OP had. But yeah, I noticed that as I was typing, but couldn't be bothered to change it.

  • Create session bean using interfaces, not implementation classes

    Hi,
    I'm using interfaces and session beans for my persistence/data layer in my adf application.
    I've created a data control for my session bean and during creation of this data control, javabean.xml files are created for the different interfaces that are used in my session bean.
    If I create bindings on these methods, interfaces in jspx-documents I will get errors because he can't find the impl-classes that implement these interfaces.
    When using interfaces in your session bean (as return values or parameters) instead of classes you need to manually create javabean.xml files for the implementation classes.
    It's required by the databindings/datacontrol that the implementation-classes are described in a javabean-format as well? Is this a spec we need to adhere to?
    Could someone verify that you need to create javabean.xml-files for as well the interfaces as the classes when you're working with interfaces in your session beans?
    regards,
    Nathalie

    A patch was released by Oracle to be able to work with Interfaces and so it's not required to work with implementation-classes.
    Patch for 5726754(Base bug 5657179)

  • Interfaces and implementing them

    public interface foo{
    public int blah();
    public interface foo2{
    public int blah2()
    how would I go around implementing foo and foo2

    I don't think it makes sense to have "inner interfaces". You can implement foo2 as
    public class A implements foo.foo2 {
      public int blah2() { return 2; }
    }or both interfaces (looks funny)
    public class A implements foo, foo.foo2 {
      public int blah() { return 1; }
      public int blah2() { return 2; }
    }

  • Interfaces and implementation

    My first lecture in "Programming Distributed Components" included this code listing:
    import java.util.Date;
    import java.util.Comparator;
    import java.io.*;
    public interface LogMessage
    public Date getDate();
    public String getMessage();
    public String getSource();
    public Comparator BY_DATE_DESC = new Comparator()
    public int compare(Object o1, Object o2)
    LogMessage lhs = (LogMessage) o1;
    LogMessage rhs = (LogMessage) o2;
    int dateCompare = rhs.getDate().compareTo(lhs.getDate());
    if(dateCompare == 0)//in the event that dates are equal sort by message
    {                    //note - this is still a descending sort.
    dateCompare = rhs.getMessage().compareTo(lhs.getMessage());
    return dateCompare;
    Call me stupid (please don't) but I was brought up to believe that java interfaces did not contain code implementation. Has the world gone mad or just my University lecturer? Or is it me? If the above code looks correct to you what is it that I am missing in my understanding of interfaces?
    Thanks

    I've not come across anything like this before. The
    interfaces I have seen have tended to be rather simple
    affairs consisting of simple contant declarations and
    method signatures.They usually are. Your professor is getting fancy on you. Perhaps the point is to make you question what you think you know.
    This opens up to me some other questions such as what
    limitations are placed on the use of such objects? If
    an object is a constant does that mean all its members
    are constants? Why no use of "final" in this context -
    is it already implicit in interfaces?There are no constants in Java per se. There are finals, which are variables that cannot be assigned once. A final primitve is effectively a constant and a final reference to an immutable Object (like a String) is effectively a constant (for our purposes.) All variables in interfaces are implicitly static and final.

  • Maximum number of interfaces to implement

    I was searching for the maximum number of interfaces a class can implement.
    The only references I found, was "more than one", "a two-byte count of the number of interfaces implemented by the class (or interface) defined" and the maximum number for the Java Card VM (15).
    Does this mean that I can implement as much interfaces as I want (as long as the count of the total fits in a two-byte field - whatever that field is)?
    Can anyone tell me how much exactly?
    TIA,
    Mylene

    This compiles fine:
    interface I0 { void doit(); }
    interface I1 { void doit(); }
    interface I2 { void doit(); }
    interface I3 { void doit(); }
    interface I4 { void doit(); }
    interface I5 { void doit(); }
    interface I6 { void doit(); }
    interface I7 { void doit(); }
    interface I8 { void doit(); }
    interface I9 { void doit(); }
    interface I10 { void doit(); }
    interface I11 { void doit(); }
    interface I12 { void doit(); }
    interface I13 { void doit(); }
    interface I14 { void doit(); }
    interface I15 { void doit(); }
    interface I16 { void doit(); }
    interface I17 { void doit(); }
    interface I18 { void doit(); }
    interface I19 { void doit(); }
    interface I20 { void doit(); }
    interface I21 { void doit(); }
    interface I22 { void doit(); }
    interface I23 { void doit(); }
    interface I24 { void doit(); }
    interface I25 { void doit(); }
    interface I26 { void doit(); }
    interface I27 { void doit(); }
    interface I28 { void doit(); }
    interface I29 { void doit(); }
    interface I30 { void doit(); }
    interface I31 { void doit(); }
    interface I32 { void doit(); }
    interface I33 { void doit(); }
    interface I34 { void doit(); }
    interface I35 { void doit(); }
    interface I36 { void doit(); }
    interface I37 { void doit(); }
    interface I38 { void doit(); }
    interface I39 { void doit(); }
    interface I40 { void doit(); }
    interface I41 { void doit(); }
    interface I42 { void doit(); }
    interface I43 { void doit(); }
    interface I44 { void doit(); }
    interface I45 { void doit(); }
    interface I46 { void doit(); }
    interface I47 { void doit(); }
    interface I48 { void doit(); }
    interface I49 { void doit(); }
    interface I50 { void doit(); }
    interface I51 { void doit(); }
    interface I52 { void doit(); }
    interface I53 { void doit(); }
    interface I54 { void doit(); }
    interface I55 { void doit(); }
    interface I56 { void doit(); }
    interface I57 { void doit(); }
    interface I58 { void doit(); }
    interface I59 { void doit(); }
    interface I60 { void doit(); }
    interface I61 { void doit(); }
    interface I62 { void doit(); }
    interface I63 { void doit(); }
    interface I64 { void doit(); }
    interface I65 { void doit(); }
    interface I66 { void doit(); }
    interface I67 { void doit(); }
    interface I68 { void doit(); }
    interface I69 { void doit(); }
    interface I70 { void doit(); }
    interface I71 { void doit(); }
    interface I72 { void doit(); }
    interface I73 { void doit(); }
    interface I74 { void doit(); }
    interface I75 { void doit(); }
    interface I76 { void doit(); }
    interface I77 { void doit(); }
    interface I78 { void doit(); }
    interface I79 { void doit(); }
    interface I80 { void doit(); }
    interface I81 { void doit(); }
    interface I82 { void doit(); }
    interface I83 { void doit(); }
    interface I84 { void doit(); }
    interface I85 { void doit(); }
    interface I86 { void doit(); }
    interface I87 { void doit(); }
    interface I88 { void doit(); }
    interface I89 { void doit(); }
    interface I90 { void doit(); }
    interface I91 { void doit(); }
    interface I92 { void doit(); }
    interface I93 { void doit(); }
    interface I94 { void doit(); }
    interface I95 { void doit(); }
    interface I96 { void doit(); }
    interface I97 { void doit(); }
    interface I98 { void doit(); }
    interface I99 { void doit(); }
    interface I100 { void doit(); }
    interface I101 { void doit(); }
    interface I102 { void doit(); }
    interface I103 { void doit(); }
    interface I104 { void doit(); }
    interface I105 { void doit(); }
    interface I106 { void doit(); }
    interface I107 { void doit(); }
    interface I108 { void doit(); }
    interface I109 { void doit(); }
    interface I110 { void doit(); }
    interface I111 { void doit(); }
    interface I112 { void doit(); }
    interface I113 { void doit(); }
    interface I114 { void doit(); }
    interface I115 { void doit(); }
    interface I116 { void doit(); }
    interface I117 { void doit(); }
    interface I118 { void doit(); }
    interface I119 { void doit(); }
    interface I120 { void doit(); }
    interface I121 { void doit(); }
    interface I122 { void doit(); }
    interface I123 { void doit(); }
    interface I124 { void doit(); }
    interface I125 { void doit(); }
    interface I126 { void doit(); }
    interface I127 { void doit(); }
    public class uu implements I0
    ,I1
    ,I2
    ,I3
    ,I4
    ,I5
    ,I6
    ,I7
    ,I8
    ,I9
    ,I10
    ,I11
    ,I12
    ,I13
    ,I14
    ,I15
    ,I16
    ,I17
    ,I18
    ,I19
    ,I20
    ,I21
    ,I22
    ,I23
    ,I24
    ,I25
    ,I26
    ,I27
    ,I28
    ,I29
    ,I30
    ,I31
    ,I32
    ,I33
    ,I34
    ,I35
    ,I36
    ,I37
    ,I38
    ,I39
    ,I40
    ,I41
    ,I42
    ,I43
    ,I44
    ,I45
    ,I46
    ,I47
    ,I48
    ,I49
    ,I50
    ,I51
    ,I52
    ,I53
    ,I54
    ,I55
    ,I56
    ,I57
    ,I58
    ,I59
    ,I60
    ,I61
    ,I62
    ,I63
    ,I64
    ,I65
    ,I66
    ,I67
    ,I68
    ,I69
    ,I70
    ,I71
    ,I72
    ,I73
    ,I74
    ,I75
    ,I76
    ,I77
    ,I78
    ,I79
    ,I80
    ,I81
    ,I82
    ,I83
    ,I84
    ,I85
    ,I86
    ,I87
    ,I88
    ,I89
    ,I90
    ,I91
    ,I92
    ,I93
    ,I94
    ,I95
    ,I96
    ,I97
    ,I98
    ,I99
    ,I100
    ,I101
    ,I102
    ,I103
    ,I104
    ,I105
    ,I106
    ,I107
    ,I108
    ,I109
    ,I110
    ,I111
    ,I112
    ,I113
    ,I114
    ,I115
    ,I116
    ,I117
    ,I118
    ,I119
    ,I120
    ,I121
    ,I122
    ,I123
    ,I124
    ,I125
    ,I126
    ,I127
    public void doit(){}
    }

Maybe you are looking for

  • FM 8.0.4 patch for 8.0.2 versions released

    From FM product management: The EFG (English, French, German) Patch for users who are still on 8.0.2 (p273) is live now. This is also called 8.0.4 (p277) and is available through Adobe Updater as of now. These users will directly move from 8.0.2 -> 8

  • XML Parser for Java version 2.0.2.9

    I can no longer find the XML parser for Java (version 2.0.2.9) for Sun Solaris and Oracle version 8.1.7.3. This would be the file xmlparserv2.jar for parser version 2.0.2.9 This file support the latest Oracle Applications work flow version and so is

  • Standard workflow for FB60 vendor invoice

    Dear experts, I am looking for a standard workflow for transaction FB60. Is that WS00400012(BO: BSEG)? I just wonder if I could check the link between a transaction and business object. In SWO1, BSEG is noted as "Accounting document line item". So i

  • TS4268 My iMessage won't let me sign in

    I have updated to ios7 but my I message won't work because it won't sign in with my Apple ID. I have tried this I'd everywhere else and works fine. The error message comes up and say network connection, I have been connected to two routers and cellul

  • I phone won't charge

    Hi my I phone4 won't charge It's 1 year old do I need a new battery Thanks