Interfaces, Abstract Classes & Polymorphism

I have a friend taking a Java course as part of a larger degree program, and she's asked for some help with an assignment. The assignment is as follows:
This assignment is to write a simple encryption/decryption application. There will be a single application
that the user can use to encrypt or decrypt a phrase passed in on the command line, with the user deciding
which encryption/decryption scheme to use.
The first scheme is to add 1 to each character that is in the phrase, the other is to subtract 1 from each
character that is in the phrase.
To encrypt, you must be able to use the follwing syntax:
java Crypto encrypt Additive "hello"
Output:
"hello" encrypts to: "ifmmmp"
To decrypt:
java ca.bcit.cst.comp2256.a###### decrypt Additive "ifmmp"
Output:
"ifmmp" decrypts to: "hello"
Use Additive or Subtractive as the arguments to choose which encryption/decryption to
use. The problem is, I'm not entirely sure how to use abstract classes and interfaces to do what is being asked. I'm pretty sure I could do the whole program in a single for-loop, but apparently her teacher doesn't want people coming up with their own solutions for the problem. I don't need any code for how to do it, per se, I'm just wondering how one would structure a program like that to include interfaces, polymorphism and abstract classes.
Anyone have any ideas?

with the user deciding which encryption/decryption scheme to use.This is the key sentence. encryption/decryption can be done using multiple schemes. The contract for any given scheme can be defined using
public String encrypt(String input);
public String decrypt(String input);There can be multiple implementations for these methods, one set for each scheme.
The contract therefore becomes the interface and each implementation is a concrete implementation of this interface.
The problem doesn't delve deep into the kind of schemes available. If it does and there is a significant overlap between 2 schemes, an abstract class that takes care of the shared logic among 2 schemes comes into picture.
Hope this helps!

Similar Messages

Interfaces / Abstract classes / ResultSets

I want to set the fetch size of each java.sql.ResultSet throughout my application, in one place. ResultSet is an interface and a ResultSet is returned by a call to PreparedStatement.execute(). So I figured I could implement ResultSet in an abstract class of my own and just override getFetchSize() or put a setFetchSize() in the constructor. Anyway, it seems I get a ClassCastException when casting the ResultSet returned from PreparedStatement.execute() to MyResultSet:
java.lang.ClassCastException: oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleResultSetImpl
I've tried having MyResultSet implement oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleResultSet too just in case. But no luck there either. If I try and implement OracleResultSetImpl I'm told it's not public and so can't be accessed from outside the package.
Can I do this somehow? Or an alternative, simple way?

I want to set the fetch size of each
java.sql.ResultSet throughout my application, in one
place. ResultSet is an interface and a ResultSet is
returned by a call to PreparedStatement.execute(). So
I figured I could implement ResultSet in an abstract
class of my own and just override getFetchSize() or
put a setFetchSize() in the constructor.Yes, you can.
Anyway, it
seems I get a ClassCastException when casting the
ResultSet returned from PreparedStatement.execute()
to MyResultSet:Well, you have to re-implement PreparedStatement as well, otherwise of course it won't even know that your class exists, let alone use it.
Serializabe z = method();
If I define method() to return a String, it doesn't mean that it'll suddenly return something else simply because I wrote it and it also implements Serializable.
java.lang.ClassCastException:
oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleResultSetImplThe object you get is simply not an instance of your class.
Simple way around: create a wrapper class around the original ResultSet that does what your implementation did.

Situation where you are interface & abstract class?

please let me know if any one knowns answer for the above question

But my doubt in which situation we r using interface
and abstarct classesWithout repeating the debates, you should use interfaces to define the contract for developers to use. This is usually done when nothing is known about the concrete implementation but the design is ready. This is also useful when you need to have multiple inheritance.
Abstract classes are useful when you want to force the implementation of some of the methods onto the developers, rather than everyone having their own implementations. This is preferred when there is some concrete idea of some of the methods in the class while the implementations of the remaining methods can vary with the specialization of the sub-classes.
You might want to read this:
http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/javaqa/2001-04/03-qa-0420-abstract.html

Interface & abstract class

1>whats the basic difference between an interface and an abstract class?
when should one be using an interface or an abstract class?
2>whats the difference between method overriding and method overlaoding?
does both of them has any relation with the instance of te class implementing them?

http://www.google.com/search?q=java+interface+%22abstract+class%22
http://www.google.com/search?q=java+method+overloading+overriding

Abstract Class Polymorphism?

I want to be able to add any of my sub classes to a collection (hash set) , without duplicating the code. The superclass for all these subclasses is an abstract class.
Is there a possible way of achieving this?
At the moment I have methods for each individual class; before making the parent class abstract, I could use the same method for all, but was advised as I did not want an instance of that parent class, the abstract class was best.
Hope this is not too vague or abstract... :)

I think if you use the wildcard symbol it'll allow you to add a covariant to the collection, for example
public static void addSub(List<? super NameofSuperClass> varName)
When you can to retrieve the data, if you want any methods not in the super class you would still be to cast it.
Is this what you meant? - Peter sorry if it wasn't helpful

Ordered & unordered arraylist with interface & abstract class

you can remove this
Edited by: Taco_John on Mar 9, 2008 7:38 PM

http://www.google.com/search?q=java+interface+%22abstract+class%22
http://www.google.com/search?q=java+method+overloading+overriding

Dealing with abstract classes and interfaces with XMLBeans

I'm quite new to XMLBeans and would like some help. I've got things working when
you are only saving concreate classes as XML, but when it comes to clesses containing
interfaces I am running into problems.
I basically have a collection of XY objects (see below) that I want to save as
XML.
I want to convert the following java classes to an xml schema:
public class XY{
X x;
Y y;
public interface X{
void setA(int a);
int getA();
public interface Y{
void setB(int b);
int getB();
public class X1 implements X{
void setA(int a);
int getA();
//other data to save
public class X2 implements X{
void setA(int a);
int getA();
//other data to save
public class Y1 implements Y{
void setB(int b);
int getB();
//other data to save
public class Y2 implements Y{
void setB(int b);
int getB();
//other data to save
What would be the best way to convert these to XML Schema? I've looked through
all the XMLBeans documentation, but it doesn't say anything about dealing with
interfaces/abstract classes. Is there anywhere else to look?
Thanks in advance,
Andrew

Anurag,
What I really wanted was a work-around to using substiutionGroups as substitution
groups are not supported in this release.
I want to convert the following schema:
<xsd:complexType name="PublicationType">
<xsd:sequence>
<xsd:element name="Title" type="xsd:string"/>
<xsd:element name="Author" type="xsd:string" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
<xsd:element name="Date" type="xsd:gYear"/>
</xsd:sequence>
</xsd:complexType>
<xsd:complexType name="BookType">
<xsd:complexContent>
<xsd:extension base="PublicationType" >
<xsd:sequence>
<xsd:element name="ISBN" type="xsd:string"/>
<xsd:element name="Publisher" type="xsd:string"/>
</xsd:sequence>
</xsd:extension>
</xsd:complexContent>
</xsd:complexType>
<xsd:complexType name="MagazineType">
<xsd:complexContent>
<xsd:restriction base="PublicationType">
<xsd:sequence>
<xsd:element name="Title" type="xsd:string"/>
<xsd:element name="Date" type="xsd:gYear"/>
</xsd:sequence>
</xsd:restriction>
</xsd:complexContent>
</xsd:complexType>
<xsd:element name="Publication" type="PublicationType"/>
<xsd:element name="Book" substitutionGroup="Publication" type="BookType"/>
<xsd:element name="Magazine" substitutionGroup="Publication" type="MagazineType"/>
<xsd:element name="BookStore">
<xsd:complexType>
<xsd:sequence>
<xsd:element ref="Publication" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
</xsd:sequence>
</xsd:complexType>
</xsd:element>
to produce an XML file like:
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<BookStore ¡Ä>
<Book>
<Title>Illusions: The Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah</Title>
<Author>Richard Bach</Author>
<Date>1977</Date>
<ISBN>0-440-34319-4</ISBN>
<Publisher>Dell Publishing Co.</Publisher>
</Book>
<Magazine>
<Title>Natural Health</Title>
<Date>1999</Date>
</Magazine>
<Book>
<Title>The First and Last Freedom</Title>
<Author>J. Krishnamurti</Author>
<Date>1954</Date>
<ISBN>0-06-064831-7</ISBN>
<Publisher>Harper & Row</Publisher>
</Book>
</BookStore>
What is the best way to do this without using substitution types?
Thanks,
Andrew
"Anurag" <[email protected]> wrote:
Andrew,
Could you please paste/attach a sample of the code you are using to convert
Java bean classes to XMLBeans?
In the current release the goal of XMLBeans technology was to convert
from
XML Schemas or XML files to XMLBeans. The focus was not towards conversion
of Java beans to XMLBeans.
Regards,
Anurag
"Andrew" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
I'm quite new to XMLBeans and would like some help. I've got thingsworking when
you are only saving concreate classes as XML, but when it comes toclesses
containing
interfaces I am running into problems.
I basically have a collection of XY objects (see below) that I wantto
save as
XML.
I want to convert the following java classes to an xml schema:
public class XY{
X x;
Y y;
public interface X{
void setA(int a);
int getA();
public interface Y{
void setB(int b);
int getB();
public class X1 implements X{
void setA(int a);
int getA();
//other data to save
public class X2 implements X{
void setA(int a);
int getA();
//other data to save
public class Y1 implements Y{
void setB(int b);
int getB();
//other data to save
public class Y2 implements Y{
void setB(int b);
int getB();
//other data to save
What would be the best way to convert these to XML Schema? I've lookedthrough
all the XMLBeans documentation, but it doesn't say anything about dealingwith
interfaces/abstract classes. Is there anywhere else to look?
Thanks in advance,
Andrew

Abstract Classes versus Interfaces

Somebody at work has just made an interesting observation and its bugging me, comments please.
When I started Java I just used classes (and abstract classes), and didnt bother with Interfaces I understood them to be a way of getting round the lack of MultipleInheritance and it wasnt a problem that concerned me.
But as time went on I found that sometimes I did want classes that had little in common to provide some additional feature (such as logging), and interfaces were great for this.
..so I was happy ..
During all this time if I want a HashSet I would write code like this
HashSet dataSet = new HashSet();but then I read that HashSet was an implementation detail and we should be using Interfaces as follows:
Set dataSet = new HashSet();So whereas before I might have had a class hierachy with an Abstract class at the top , I started slotting in Interfaces above that and viewing the Abstract class as just a convenience to implementing the Interface.
So which is the right method , originally I saw subclassing object as an 'is a ' relationship and implementing an interface as a 'implements' relationship. But more recently it seems to be turned on its head and implementing an interface is an 'is a' relationship (but supports multiple inheritance)
Also it seems to be the trouble with this second approach is that anyone can implement an interface, for example I could implement Set,Map and List with one class, the class hierachy is not so helpful .

Thanks, but the question was alot wider than that,
the HashSet example was just one part of it.I think it is representative of all the situations that you talk about, which are whether an instantiator should handle the instantiated object by its interface or by its implementation.
I suppose the question is
"How do you code model "is a " relationship in java
through extending a class or creating an interface
and implementing it"
MySubClass extends MySuperClass implements MyInterface {}MySubClass is a MySuperClass and a MyInterface. The way that I view it, the "is a" relationship applies to all type inheritance, even for the multiple type inheritance that you can have with interfaces. The "is a" relationship doesn't doesn't have to be a 1:1 mapping. There's no point in thinking about it differently since that's how the language behaves.
an alternative question is
"is it correct to mix/match both methods I described
above"I thought I gave an answer. You said that my answer is not "broad enough." How so? My answer was that handling an object that you instantiate by its interface can reduce the amount of changes you have to make if you change the implementation. You will have to make one change (the line of code that instantiates the object) instead of many. Also, handling it by its interface makes it easier to switch from object A instantiating object B to object A being passed a reference to B and to object A getting its dependencies injected by XML configuration.
It seems weird to handle an object by its interface if you already know it's implementation, but it's commonly seen and this is why I think it must be used. As I said, it's a small benefit of abstraction.
The times when you may not want to do this is when the instantiator has to call methods from different interfaces of the object. You can handle it by its interface by casting between the different interfaces you have to work with, or you can just handle it by its implementation, gaining access to all of the object's interfaces.
Note that everything I explained concerns the type by which the instantiator handles an instantiated object. If a class does not instantiate a certain object, then it almost always should receive it by its interface, unless it's some really common implementation that's never going to change.
I use interface, abstract class, and base class interchangeably. It's up to you to decide which to use for type inheritance. It's good practice to favor interfaces.

Abstract Class & Interfaces

Can anyone please tell me as to why we need both an abstract class & an interface? I was asked in an interview as to why we need 2 separate concepts when we can get the similar functionality of an interface by using an abstract class. I had just sited their differences like:
1) An abstract class can have both abstract & normal methods & that we can specify different access specifiers for its class members.
2) ABAP does not support Multiple inheritance but that we could simulate the same using interfaces concept in ABAP.
But he wasnt satisfied with the answer. I guess he was expecting something from a practical point of view. I did try searching the old threads but there wasnt anything similar to this. Anyone please explain by citing a scenario as to why we would need 2 separate concepts & not just one .
Thanks in advance

Hi
Abstract classes
Abstract classes are normally used as an incomplete blueprint for concrete (that is, non-abstract) subclasses, for example to define a uniform interface.
Classes with at least one abstract method are themselves abstract.
Static methods and constructors cannot be abstract.
You can specify the class of the instance to be created explicitly: CREATE OBJECT <RefToAbstractClass> TYPE <NonAbstractSubclassName>.
Abstarct classes themselves cant be instantiated ( althrough their subclasses can)
Reference to abstract classes can refer to instance of subclass
Abstract (instance) methods are difined in the class , but not implemented
They must be redefined in subclasses
CLASS LC1 DEFINAITION ABSTARCT
PUBLIC SECTION
METHODS ESTIMATE ABSTARCT IMPORTING
ENDCLASS.
<b>Interfaces</b>
Interfaces only describe the external point of contact of a class (protocols), they do not contain any implementation.
Interfaces are usually defined by a user. The user describes in the interface which services (technical and semantic) it needs in order to carry out a task.
The user never actually knows the providers of these services, but communicates with them through the interface.
In this way the user is protected from actual implementations and can work in the same way with different classes/objects, as long as they provide the services required. This is known as polymorphism with interfaces.

Abstract Class & Interface

Hi ,
I have a fundamental doubt regarding Abstract Class & Interface!!!
What is their real benefit...whether we implement an interface or extend an Abstract class we have to write the code for the abstract method in the concrete class.Then where the benefit remained....
And it is said that Abstract class provide default behaviour...what is the actual meaning of that?
Thanks & Regards
Santosh

In this section we will redesign our OneRowNim game to fit within a hierarchy of classes of two-player games. There are many games that characteristically involve two players: checkers, chess, tic-tac-toe, guessing games, and so forth. However, there are also many games that involve just one player: blackjack, solitaire, and others. There are also games that involve two or more players, such as many card games. Thus, our redesign of OneRowNim as part of a two-player game hierarchy will not be our last effort to design a hierarchy of game-playing classes. We will certainly redesign things as we learn new Java language constructs and as we try to extend our game library to other kinds of games.
This case study will illustrate how we can apply inheritance and polymorphism, as well as other object-oriented design principles. The justification for revising OneRowNim at this point is to make it easier to design and develop other two-player games. As we have seen, one characteristic of class hierarchies is that more general attributes and methods are defined in top-level classes. As one proceeds down the hierarchy, the methods and attributes become more specialized. Creating a subclass is a matter of specializing a given class.
8.6.1. Design Goals
One of our design goals is to revise the OneRowNim game so that it fits into a hierarchy of two-player games. One way to do this is to generalize the OneRowNim game by creating a superclass that contains those attributes and methods that are common to all two-player games. The superclass will define the most general and generic elements of two-player games. All two-player games, including OneRowNim, will be defined as subclasses of this top-level superclass and will inherit and possibly override its public and protected variables and methods. Also, our top-level class will contain certain abstract methods, whose implementations will be given in OneRowNim and other subclasses.
Generic superclass
A second goal is to design a class hierarchy that makes it possible for computers to play the game, as well as human users. Thus, for a given two-player game, it should be possible for two humans to play each other, or for two computers to play each other, or for a human to play against a computer. This design goal will require that our design exhibit a certain amount of flexibility. As we shall see, this is a situation in which Java interfaces will come in handy.
[Page 376]
Another important goal is to design a two-player game hierarchy that can easily be used with a variety of different user interfaces, including command-line interfaces and GUIs. To handle this feature, we will develop Java interfaces to serve as interfaces between our two-player games and various user interfaces.
8.6.2. Designing the TwoPlayerGame Class
To begin revising the design of the OneRowNim game, we first need to design a top-level class, which we will call the TwoPlayerGame class. What variables and methods belong in this class? One way to answer this question is to generalize our current version of OneRowNim by moving any variables and methods that apply to all two-player games up to the TwoPlayerGame class. All subclasses of TwoPlayerGamewhich includes the OneRowNim classwould inherit these elements. Figure 8.18 shows the current design of OneRowNim.
Figure 8.18. The current OneRowNim class.
What variables and methods should we move up to the TwoPlayerGame class? Clearly, the class constants, PLAYER_ONE and PLAYER_TWO, apply to all two-player games. These should be moved up. On the other hand, the MAX_PICKUP and MAX_STICKS constants apply just to the OneRowNim game. They should remain in the OneRowNim class.
The nSticks instance variable is a variable that only applies to the OneRowNim game but not to other two-player games. It should stay in the OneRowNim class. On the other hand, the onePlaysNext variable applies to all two-player games, so we will move it up to the TwoPlayerGame class.
Because constructors are not inherited, all of the constructor methods will remain in the OneRowNim class. The instance methods, takeSticks() and getSticks(), are specific to OneRowNim, so they should remain there. However, the other methods, getPlayer(), gameOver(), getWinner(), and reportGameState(), are methods that would be useful to all two-player games. Therefore these methods should be moved up to the superclass. Of course, while these methods can be defined in the superclass, some of them can only be implemented in subclasses. For example, the reportGameState() method reports the current state of the game, so it has to be implemented in OneRowNim. Similarly, the getWinner() method defines how the winner of the game is determined, a definition that can only occur in the subclass. Every two-player game needs methods such as these. Therefore, we will define these methods as abstract methods in the superclass. The intention is that TwoPlayerGame subclasses will provide game-specific implementations for these methods.
[Page 377]
Constructors are not inherited
Given these considerations, we come up with the design shown in Figure 8.19. The design shown in this figure is much more complex than the designs used in earlier chapters. However, the complexity comes from combining ideas already discussed in previous sections of this chapter, so don't be put off by it.
Figure 8.19. TwoPlayerGame is the superclass for OneRowNim and other two-player games.
To begin with, note that we have introduced two Java interfaces into our design in addition to the TwoPlayerGame superclass. As we will show, these interfaces lead to a more flexible design and one that can easily be extended to incorporate new two-player games. Let's take each element of this design separately.
[Page 378]
8.6.3. The TwoPlayerGame Superclass
As we have stated, the purpose of the TwoPlayerGame class is to serve as the superclass for all two-player games. Therefore, it should define the variables and methods shared by two-player games.
The PLAYER_ONE, PLAYER_TWO, and onePlaysNext variables and the getPlayer(), setPlayer(), and changePlayer() methods have been moved up from the OneRowNim class. Clearly, these variables and methods apply to all two-player games. Note that we have also added three new variables, nComputers, computer1, computer2, and their corresponding methods, getNComputers() and addComputerPlayer(). We will use these elements to give our games the capability to be played by computer programs. Because we want all of our two-player games to have this capability, we define these variables and methods in the superclass rather than in OneRowNim and subclasses of TwoPlayerGame.
Note that the computer1 and computer2 variables are declared to be of type IPlayer. IPlayer is an interface containing a single method declaration, the makeAMove() method:
public interface IPlayer {
public String makeAMove(String prompt);
Why do we use an interface here rather than some type of game-playing object? This is a good design question. Using an interface here makes our design more flexible and extensible because it frees us from having to know the names of the classes that implement the makeAMove() method. The variables computer1 and computer2 will be assigned objects that implement IPlayer via the addComputerPlayer() method.
Game-dependent algorithms
The algorithms used in the various implementations of makeAMove() are game-dependentthey depend on the particular game being played. It would be impossible to define a game playing object that would suffice for all two-player games. Instead, if we want an object that plays OneRowNim, we would define a OneRowNimPlayer and have it implement the IPlayer interface. Similarly, if we want an object that plays checkers, we would define a CheckersPlayer and have it implement the IPlayer interface. By using an interface here, our TwoPlayerGame hierarchy can deal with a wide range of differently named objects that play games, as long as they implement the IPlayer interface. Using the IPlayer interface adds flexibility to our game hierarchy and makes it easier to extend it to new, yet undefined, classes. We will discuss the details of how to design a game player in Section 8.6.7.
The IPlayer interface
Turning now to the methods defined in TwoPlayerGame, we have already seen implementations of getPlayer(), setPlayer(), and changePlayer() in the OneRowNim class. We will just move those implementations up to the superclass. The getNComputers() method is the assessor method for the nComputers variable, and its implementation is routine. The addComputerPlayer() method adds a computer player to the game. Its implementation is as follows:
[Page 379]
public void addComputerPlayer(IPlayer player) {
if (nComputers == 0)
computer2 = player;
else if (nComputers == 1)
computer1 = player;
else
return; // No more than 2 players
++nComputers;
As we noted earlier, the classes that play the various TwoPlayerGames must implement the IPlayer interface. The parameter for this method is of type IPlayer. The algorithm we use checks the current value of nComputers. If it is 0, which means that this is the first IPlayer added to the game, the player is assigned to computer2. This allows the human user to be associated with PLAYERONE if this is a game between a computer and a human user.
If nComputers equals 1, which means that we are adding a second IPlayer to the game, we assign that player to computer1. In either of these cases, we increment nComputers. Note what happens if nComputers is neither 1 nor 2. In that case, we simply return without adding the IPlayer to the game and without incrementing nComputers. This, in effect, limits the number of IPlayers to two. (A more sophisticated design would throw an exception to report an error. but we will leave that for a subsequent chapter.)
The addComputerPlayer() method is used to initialize a game after it is first created. If this method is not called, the default assumption is that nComputers equals zero and that computer1 and computer2 are both null. Here's an example of how it could be used:
OneRowNim nim = new OneRowNim(11); // 11 sticks
nim.add(new NimPlayer(nim)); // 2 computer players
nim.add(new NimPlayerBad(nim));
Note that the NimPlayer() constructor takes a reference to the game as its argument. Clearly, our design should not assume that the names of the IPlayer objects would be known to the TwoPlayerGame superclass. This method allows the objects to be passed in at runtime. We will discuss the details of NimPlayerBad in Section 8.6.7.
The getrules() method is a new method whose purpose is to return a string that describes the rules of the particular game. This method is implemented in the TwoPlayerGame class with the intention that it will be overridden in the various subclasses. For example, its implementation in TwoPlayerGame is:
public String getRules() {
return "The rules of this game are: ";
Overriding a method
[Page 380]
and its redefinition in OneRowNim is:
public String getRules() {
return "\n*** The Rules of One Row Nim ***\n" +
"(1) A number of sticks between 7 and " + MAX_STICKS +
" is chosen.\n" +
"(2) Two players alternate making moves.\n" +
"(3) A move consists of subtracting between 1 and\n\t" +
MAX_PICKUP +
" sticks from the current number of sticks.\n" +
"(4) A player who cannot leave a positive\n\t" +
" number of sticks for the other player loses.\n";
The idea is that each TwoPlayerGame subclass will take responsibility for specifying its own set of rules in a form that can be displayed to the user.
You might recognize that defining geTRules() in the superclass and allowing it to be overridden in the subclasses is a form of polymorphism. It follows the design of the toString() method, which we discussed earlier. This design will allow us to use code that takes the following form:
TwoPlayerGame game = new OneRowNim();
System.out.println(game.getRules());
Polymorphism
In this example the call to getrules() is polymorphic. The dynamic-binding mechanism is used to invoke the getrules() method defined in the OneRowNim class.
The remaining methods in TwoPlayerGame are defined abstractly. The gameOver() and getWinner() methods are both game-dependent methods. That is, the details of their implementations depend on the particular TwoPlayerGame subclass in which they are implemented.
This is good example of how abstract methods should be used in designing a class hierarchy. We give abstract definitions in the superclass and leave the detailed implementations up to the individual subclasses. This allows the different subclasses to tailor the implementations to their particular needs, while allowing all subclasses to share a common signature for these tasks. This enables us to use polymorphism to create flexible, extensible class hierarchies.
Figure 8.20 shows the complete implementation of the abstract TwoPlayerGame class. We have already discussed the most important details of its implementation.
Figure 8.20. The TwoPlayerGame class
(This item is displayed on page 381 in the print version)
public abstract class TwoPlayerGame {
public static final int PLAYER_ONE = 1;
public static final int PLAYER_TWO = 2;
protected boolean onePlaysNext = true;
protected int nComputers = 0; // How many computers
// Computers are IPlayers
protected IPlayer computer1, computer2;
public void setPlayer(int starter) {
if (starter == PLAYER_TWO)
onePlaysNext = false;
else onePlaysNext = true;
} // setPlayer()
public int getPlayer() {
if (onePlaysNext)
return PLAYER_ONE;
else return PLAYER_TWO;
} // getPlayer()
public void changePlayer() {
onePlaysNext = !onePlaysNext;
} // changePlayer()
public int getNComputers() {
return nComputers;
} // getNComputers()
public String getRules() {
return "The rules of this game are: ";
} // getRules()
public void addComputerPlayer(IPlayer player) {
if (nComputers == 0)
computer2 = player;
else if (nComputers == 1)
computer1 = player;
else
return; // No more than 2 players
++nComputers;
} // addComputerPlayer()
public abstract boolean gameOver(); // Abstract Methods
public abstract String getWinner();
} // TwoPlayerGame class
Effective Design: Abstract Methods
Abstract methods allow you to give general definitions in the superclass and leave the implementation details to the different subclasses.
[Page 381]
8.6.4. The CLUIPlayableGame Interface
We turn now to the two interfaces shown in Figure 8.19. Taken together, the purpose of these interfaces is to create a connection between any two-player game and a command-line user interface (CLUI). The interfaces provide method signatures for the methods that will implement the details of the interaction between a TwoPlayerGame and a UserInterface. Because the details of this interaction vary from game to game, it is best to leave the implementation of these methods to the games themselves.
Note that CLUIPlayableGame extends the IGame interface. The IGame interface contains two methods that are used to define a standard form of communication between the CLUI and the game. The getGamePrompt() method defines the prompt used to signal the user for a move of some kindfor example, "How many sticks do you take (1, 2, or 3)?" And the reportGameState() method defines how the game will report its current statefor example, "There are 11 sticks remaining." CLUIPlayableGame adds the play() method to these two methods. As we will see shortly, the play() method contains the code that will control the playing of the game.
[Page 382]
Extending an interface
The source code for these interfaces is very simple:
public interface CLUIPlayableGame extends IGame {
public abstract void play(UserInterface ui);
public interface IGame {
public String getGamePrompt();
public String reportGameState();
} // IGame
Note that the CLUIPlayableGame interface extends the IGame interface. A CLUIPlayableGame is a game that can be played through a CLUI. The purpose of its play() method is to contain the game-dependent control loop that determines how the game is played via a user interface (UI). In pseudocode, a typical control loop for a game would look something like the following:
Initialize the game.
While the game is not over
Report the current state of the game via the UI.
Prompt the user (or the computer) to make a move via the UI.
Get the user's move via the UI.
Make the move.
Change to the other player.
The play loop sets up an interaction between the game and the UI. The UserInterface parameter allows the game to connect directly to a particular UI. To allow us to play our games through a variety of UIs, we define UserInterface as the following Java interface:
public interface UserInterface {
public String getUserInput();
public void report(String s);
public void prompt(String s);
Any object that implements these three methods can serve as a UI for one of our TwoPlayerGames. This is another example of the flexibility of using interfaces in object-oriented design.
To illustrate how we use UserInterface, let's attach it to our KeyboardReader class, thereby letting a KeyboardReader serve as a CLUI for TwoPlayerGames. We do this simply by implementing this interface in the KeyboardReader class, as follows:
public class KeyboardReader implements UserInterface
[Page 383]
As it turns out, the three methods listed in UserInterface match three of the methods in the current version of KeyboardReader. This is no accident. The design of UserInterface was arrived at by identifying the minimal number of methods in KeyboardReader that were needed to interact with a TwoPlayerGame.
Effective Design: Flexibility of Java Interfaces
A Java interface provides a means of associating useful methods with a variety of different types of objects, leading to a more flexible object-oriented design.
The benefit of defining the parameter more generally as a UserInterface instead of as a KeyboardReader is that we will eventually want to allow our games to be played via other kinds of command-line interfaces. For example, we might later define an Internet-based CLUI that could be used to play OneRowNim among users on the Internet. This kind of extensibilitythe ability to create new kinds of UIs and use them with TwoPlayerGamesis another important design feature of Java interfaces.
Generality principle
Effective Design: Extensibility and Java Interfaces
Using interfaces to define useful method signatures increases the extensibility of a class hierarchy.
As Figure 8.19 shows, OneRowNim implements the CLUIPlayableGame interface, which means it must supply implementations of all three abstract methods: play(), getGamePrompt(), and reportGameState().
8.6.5. Object-Oriented Design: Interfaces or Abstract Classes?
Why are these methods defined in interfaces? Couldn't we just as easily define them in the TwoPlayerGame class and use inheritance to extend them to the various game subclasses? After all, isn't the net result the same, namely, that OneRowNim must implement all three methods.
These are very good design questions, exactly the kinds of questions one should ask when designing a class hierarchy of any sort. As we pointed out in the Animal example earlier in the chapter, you can get the same functionality from an abstract interface and an abstract superclass method. When should we put the abstract method in the superclass, and when does it belong in an interface? A very good discussion of these and related object-oriented design issues is available in Java Design, 2nd Edition, by Peter Coad and Mark Mayfield (Yourdan Press, 1999). Our discussion of these issues follows many of the guidelines suggested by Coad and Mayfield.
Interfaces vs. abstract methods
We have already seen that using Java interfaces increases the flexibility and extensibility of a design. Methods defined in an interface exist independently of a particular class hierarchy. By their very nature, interfaces can be attached to any class, and this makes them very flexible to use.
Flexibility of interfaces
Another useful guideline for answering this question is that the superclass should contain the basic common attributes and methods that define a certain type of object. It should not necessarily contain methods that define certain roles that the object plays. For example, the gameOver() and getWinner() methods are fundamental parts of the definition of a TwoPlayerGame. One cannot define a game without defining these methods. By contrast, methods such as play(), getGamePrompt(), and reportGameState() are important for playing the game but they do not contribute in the same way to the game's definition. Thus these methods are best put into an interface. Therefore, one important design guideline is:
[Page 384]
Effective Design: Abstract Methods
Methods defined abstractly in a superclass should contribute in a fundamental way to the basic definition of that type of object, not merely to one of its roles or its functionality.
8.6.6. The Revised OneRowNim Class
Figure 8.21 provides a listing of the revised OneRowNim class, one that fits into the TwoPlayerGame class hierarchy. Our discussion in this section will focus on the features of the game that are new or revised.
Figure 8.21. The revised OneRowNim class, Part I.
(This item is displayed on page 385 in the print version)
public class OneRowNim extends TwoPlayerGame implements CLUIPlayableGame {
public static final int MAX_PICKUP = 3;
public static final int MAX_STICKS = 11;
private int nSticks = MAX_STICKS;
public OneRowNim() { } // Constructors
public OneRowNim(int sticks) {
nSticks = sticks;
} // OneRowNim()
public OneRowNim(int sticks, int starter) {
nSticks = sticks;
setPlayer(starter);
} // OneRowNim()
public boolean takeSticks(int num) {
if (num < 1 || num > MAX_PICKUP || num > nSticks)
return false; // Error
else // Valid move
{ nSticks = nSticks - num;
return true;
} // else
} // takeSticks()
public int getSticks() {
return nSticks;
} // getSticks()
public String getRules() {
return "\n*** The Rules of One Row Nim ***\n" +
"(1) A number of sticks between 7 and " + MAX_STICKS +
" is chosen.\n" +
"(2) Two players alternate making moves.\n" +
"(3) A move consists of subtracting between 1 and\n\t" +
MAX_PICKUP + " sticks from the current number of sticks.\n" +
"(4) A player who cannot leave a positive\n\t" +
" number of sticks for the other player loses.\n";
} // getRules()
public boolean gameOver() {   /*** From TwoPlayerGame */
return (nSticks <= 0);
} // gameOver()
public String getWinner() {        /*** From TwoPlayerGame */
if (gameOver()) //{
return "" + getPlayer() + " Nice game.";
return "The game is not over yet."; // Game is not over
} // getWinner()
The gameOver() and getWinner() methods, which are nowinherited from the TwoPlayerGame superclass, are virtually the same as in the previous version. One small change is that getWinner() now returns a String instead of an int. This makes the method more generally useful as a way of identifying the winner for all TwoPlayerGames.
Similarly, the getGamePrompt() and reportGameState() methods merely encapsulate functionality that was present in the earlier version of the game. In our earlier version the prompts to the user were generated directly by the main program. By encapsulating this information in an inherited method, we make it more generally useful to all TwoPlayerGames.
Inheritance and generality
The major change to OneRowNim comes in the play() method, which controls the playing of OneRowNim (Fig. 8.22). Because this version of the game incorporates computer players, the play loop is a bit more complex than in earlier versions of the game. The basic idea is still the same: The method loops until the game is over. On each iteration of the loop, one or the other of the two players, PLAYER_ONE or PLAYER_TWO, takes a turn making a movethat is, deciding how many sticks to pick up. If the move is a legal move, then it becomes the other player's turn.
Figure 8.22. The revised OneRowNim class, Part II.
(This item is displayed on page 386 in the print version)
/** From CLUIPlayableGame */
public String getGamePrompt() {
return "\nYou can pick up between 1 and " +
Math.min(MAX_PICKUP,nSticks) + " : ";
} // getGamePrompt()
public String reportGameState() {
if (!gameOver())
return ("\nSticks left: " + getSticks() +
" Who's turn: Player " + getPlayer());
else
return ("\nSticks left: " + getSticks() +
" Game over! Winner is Player " + getWinner() +"\n");
} // reportGameState()
public void play(UserInterface ui) { // From CLUIPlayableGame interface
int sticks = 0;
ui.report(getRules());
if (computer1 != null)
ui.report("\nPlayer 1 is a " + computer1.toString());
if (computer2 != null)
ui.report("\nPlayer 2 is a " + computer2.toString());
while(!gameOver()) {
IPlayer computer = null; // Assume no computers
ui.report(reportGameState());
switch(getPlayer()) {
case PLAYER_ONE: // Player 1's turn
computer = computer1;
break;
case PLAYER_TWO: // Player 2's turn
computer = computer2;
break;
} // cases
if (computer != null) {                           // If computer's turn
sticks = Integer.parseInt(computer.makeAMove(""));
ui.report(computer.toString() + " takes " + sticks + " sticks.\n");
} else {                                          // otherwise, user's turn
ui.prompt(getGamePrompt());
sticks =
Integer.parseInt(ui.getUserInput()); // Get user's move
if (takeSticks(sticks)) // If a legal move
changePlayer();
} // while
ui.report(reportGameState()); // The game is now over
} // play()
} // OneRowNim class
Let's look now at how the code decides whether it is a computer's turn to move or a human player's turn. Note that at the beginning of the while loop, it sets the computer variable to null. It then assigns computer a value of either computer1 or computer2, depending on whose turn it is. But recall that one or both of these variables may be null, depending on how many computers are playing the game. If there are no computers playing the game, then both variables will be null. If only one computer is playing, then computer1 will be null. This is determined during initialization of the game, when the addComputerPlayer() is called. (See above.)
In the code following the switch statement, if computer is not null, then we call computer.makeAMove(). As we know, the makeAMove() method is part of the IPlayer interface. The makeAMove() method takes a String parameter that is meant to serve as a prompt, and returns a String that is meant to represent the IPlayer's move:
public interface IPlayer {
public String makeAMove(String prompt);
[Page 385]
In OneRowNim the "move" is an integer, representing the number of sticks the player picks. Therefore, in play() OneRowNim has to convert the String into an int, which represents the number of sticks the IPlayer picks up.
On the other hand, if computer is null, this means that it is a human user's turn to play. In this case, play() calls ui.getUserInput(), employing the user interface to input a value from the keyboard. The user's input must also be converted from String to int. Once the value of sticks is set, either from the user or from the IPlayer, the play() method calls takeSticks(). If the move is legal, then it changes whose turn it is, and the loop repeats.
[Page 386]
There are a couple of important points about the design of the play() method. First, the play() method has to know what to do with the input it receives from the user or the IPlayer. This is game-dependent knowledge. The user is inputting the number of sticks to take in OneRowNim. For a tic-tac-toe game, the "move" might represent a square on the tic-tac-toe board. This suggests that play() is a method that should be implemented in OneRowNim, as it is here, because OneRowNim encapsulates the knowledge of how to play the One-Row Nim game.
Encapsulation of game-dependent knowledge
[Page

Mixing polymorphism with abstract classes???

Hi,
Can you have polymorhism with abstract superclasses in Java?
For example, say I have a superclass called Pet:
abstract class Pet {
     private String name;
     public String getName() {
          return name;
    public void setName(String petName) {
         name = petName;
    public String speak() {
         return "I am a Pet";
}Now I have a Cat subclass:
public class Cat extends Pet{
    public String speak {
         return "i am a cat";
public class Dog extends Pet {
public String fetch() {
     return "fetching a stick";
}In my test method I have:
public class TestPet {
     public static void main(String[] args) {
          Pet p = new Pet();
          System.out.println(p.speak());
          Pet p = new Dog();
          System.out.println(((Dog)p).fetch());
          Pet p = new Cat();
          System.out.println(p.speak() +" is now a cat");
}So it appears to me that you cannot have polymorphic methods with an abstract superclass - is this right?
Cheers.

cotton.m wrote:
List<Pet> pets = new ArrayList<Pet>();
I was working (more or less) along the same lines...
package forums;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.ArrayList;
abstract class Pet
private String name;
public String getName() { return this.name; }
public void setName(String name) { this.name = name; }
public String speak() {
    return "I am a Pet";
public abstract String fetch(); // <<<<< the new bit.
public String getClassName() {
    final String name = this.getClass().getName();
    return name.substring(name.lastIndexOf('.')+1).toLowerCase();
class Cat extends Pet
public Cat(String name) {
    setName(name);
public String speak() {
    return "I am a cat";
public String fetch() {
    return "No. I am a cat!";
public String rollOver() {
    return "No. I am a cat!";
class Dog extends Pet
public Dog(String name) {
    setName(name);
public String fetch() {
    return "Look boss, I'm fetching the stick.";
public String sit() {
    return "Look boss, I'm sitting!";
public class PetTest
public static void main(String[] args) {
    List<Pet> pets = new ArrayList<Pet>();
    pets.add(new Cat("Fungus"));
    pets.add(new Dog("Spike"));
    for ( Pet pet : pets ) {
      System.out.println("\""+pet.speak()+"\" said "+pet.getName()+" the "+pet.getClassName()+".");
      System.out.println("\"Go fetch\" said the master.");
      System.out.println("\""+pet.fetch()+"\" said "+pet.getName()+".");
      System.out.println();
    System.out.println("Therefore we conclude that dogs are much better pets.");
}Both these examples demonstrate that polymorphism is very useful when we have a list of different-type-if-things which have a common interface... i.e. different classes which have (a) a common ancestor; or (b) a common interface... allowing us to treat those different types-of-things as if they where one-type-of-thing, except the-different-types actually do different stuff internally, which is appropriate-to-there-specific-type.
That's the essence of polymorphism... and, of course, this seperation of "type" and "implementation" isn't limited to lists-of-stuff... it can be very useful all over the show.
Cheers. Keith.
Edited by: corlettk on 10/05/2009 11:01 ~~ That's a bit clearer.

Diffrence between a Interface and a abstract class?

Hi OO ABAP Gurus
Please clear below point to me.
Diffrence between a Interface and a abstract class?
Many thanks
Sandeep Sharma..

Hi
Abstract classes
Abstract classes are normally used as an incomplete blueprint for concrete (that is, non-abstract) subclasses, for example to define a uniform interface.
Classes with at least one abstract method are themselves abstract.
Static methods and constructors cannot be abstract.
You can specify the class of the instance to be created explicitly: CREATE OBJECT <RefToAbstractClass> TYPE <NonAbstractSubclassName>.
Abstarct classes themselves cant be instantiated ( althrough their subclasses can)
Reference to abstract classes can refer to instance of subclass
Abstract (instance) methods are difined in the class , but not implemented
They must be redefined in subclasses
CLASS LC1 DEFINAITION ABSTARCT
PUBLIC SECTION
METHODS ESTIMATE ABSTARCT IMPORTING
ENDCLASS.
Interfaces
Interfaces only describe the external point of contact of a class (protocols), they do not contain any implementation.
Interfaces are usually defined by a user. The user describes in the interface which services (technical and semantic) it needs in order to carry out a task.
The user never actually knows the providers of these services, but communicates with them through the interface.
In this way the user is protected from actual implementations and can work in the same way with different classes/objects, as long as they provide the services required. This is known as polymorphism with interfaces.
Interfaces features
INTERFACE I_COUNTER.
METHODS: SET_COUNTER IMPORTING VALUE(SET_VALUE) TYPE I,           INCREMENT_COUNTER, ENDINTERFACE.
CLASS C_COUNTER1 DEFINITION.   PUBLIC SECTION.
    INTERFACES I_COUNTER.
PRIVATE SECTION.
    DATA COUNT TYPE I.
ENDCLASS.
CLASS C_COUNTER1 IMPLEMENTATION.
METHOD I_COUNTER~SET_COUNTER.
    COUNT = SET_VALUE.
ENDMETHOD.
METHOD I_COUNTER~INCREMENT_COUNTER.
    ADD 1 TO COUNT.
ENDMETHOD.
ENDCLASS.
Refer
https://forums.sdn.sap.com/click.jspa?searchID=10535251&messageID=2902116
Regards
Kiran

What is the diff b/w Abstract class and an interface ?

Hey
I am always confused as with this issue : diff b/w Abstract class and an interface ?
Which is more powerful in what situation.
Regards
Vinay

Hi, Don't worry I am teach you
Abstract class and Interface
An abstract class can have instance methods that implement a default behavior. An Interface can only declare constants and instance methods, but cannot implement default behavior and all methods are implicitly abstract. An interface has all public members and no implementation. An abstract class is a class which may have the usual flavors of class members (private, protected, etc.), but has some abstract methods.
Edited by SASIKUMARA
SIT INNOVATIONS- Chennai
Message was edited by:
sasikumara
Message was edited by:
sasikumara

When we will go for an abstract class and when we will go for an interface?

it's always some what confusing to choose an abstract class and an interface,can anybody post a suitable answer for this.

jwenting wrote:
with experience and the insight it brings, you will know which to use when.
Without it, it can't be explained.
More often than not there's no X OR Y anyway.It's fortunate that there are posters here who possess the insight and experience necessary to explain this. The principal differences between an abstract class and an interface are,
1. An abstract class can carry implementation, whereas an interface cannot.
2. An abstract class is singly inherited, wheras an interface is multiply inherited.
So use an abstract class when the implementation it can carry outweights the fact that it cannot be multiply inherited That's the gist of it.
The inheritance relationship where this happens is when the supertype is a general concept of which all potential subtypes are special cases. This is called a specialization (or sometimes a generalization) relationship. For example Apple and Banana are Fruit. Or Car and Bike are Vechicle. The Fruit and Vechicle supertypes are general concepts of which their subtypes are special cases. In this case make Fruit and Vechicle abstract classes because the subtypes will benefit from a shared implementation.
If you don't have a clearcut specialization/generalization relationship make the supertype an interface. An example could be the Comparable supertype. The potential subtypes aren't supposed to be specializations of the Comparable concept, they're suppose to become Comparable (and make this property an integral part of their being). This is not a specialization/generalization relationship. Instead the supertype is intended to add character to the subtypes. The subtypes are unlikely to benefit from an inherited implementation. So make Comparable an interface.

Abstract class Vs interface

Hi,
I have to buid a report in ECM with complete details of the engineering as well as production. This include workflow as well as various fucntionality depends upon the criterion and user's event.
I am implementating in OOPS and I Want to know that when I should use the Abstract class and when interface ?
Because as per me both serve the same purpose. Kindly send me the exact difference so that i can efficiently use the same.
Thanks
Prince

When inheriting A Interface We have to inherit all the methods of the Interface there's no other option whereas with abstract classes we can inherit the members that we are in need of.
Just the interface has to have body of the method and the method is to be used by the classes inheriting it. Whereas in the case of Abstract Class it can have declarations (Other than the abstract method) and it can be further extended in the classes inheriting the Abstract Class.
Interface contains all abstract methods,all methods compulsory implemented by particular class, interface does not contain Constructor
abstract classes are designed with implemantion gaps for sub-class to fill in.
interfaces are sintacticlly similar to classes but they lack insance variables & methods.
abstract classes can also have both abstract methods & non-abstract methods. where as in interface methods are abstract only, & variables are implicitly static&final
regards
Preetesh

Interfaces, Abstract Classes & Polymorphism

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for