Need some input about a class I'm making.

Question

Hi guys.
Take a look at this class:
public class MyClass {
public static final byte A_PARAM1 = (byte)0x80;
public static final byte B_PARAM2 = (byte)0x40;
public static final byte A_PARAM2 = (byte)0x20;
public static final byte B_PARAM2 = (byte)0x10;
public MyClass(byte param1, byte param2) {
// Other functions go here...
}As you can see from the code the constructor takes two byte's. I wanted the static variables to be the values for that constructor A/B_PARAM1 and A/B_PARAM2 for param1 and param2 respectively. It depends on the parameters (bytes) on what other behaviour the class will have. You know, A_PARAM1 OR'ed(bitwise) with B_PARAM1. I'm sorry if I'm not making any sense as I'm not that good with explaining things.
I'm sure that most of you can already see some problems with this approach. For one, typesafety. Is that the correct term for that? Another problem is I'll be making a lot of these classes and each will have a different number of parameters for them. One or two can have as much as 5 parameters.
One solution I'm thinking about is to have the parameters(mostly just byte's) represented as a class. Maybe an generic abstract class with just simple functions of getting and setting the value. The different subclasses will contain the static variables. I was also thinking that the class that will be using it as values will be the only one that can create the subclasses of the abstract parameter class.
I don't know. Am I making any sense?
Anyway. Could anyone give me some input? Am I doing this right or is it just too much that I should just stick with what I'm currently doing? How would you go on with the problem?
Thanks in advance.

Answer 1

Hello again. The EnumSet class is making me scratch my head a bit.
I'd like to return to my initial idea of extending a class that will represent a parameter. Take a look at this:
public class MutantCarThing {
     public static final byte HAS_EYES = (byte)0x80;
     public static final byte HAS_NOSE = (byte)0x40;
     public static final byte HAS_TEETH = (byte)0x01;
     public static final byte ONE_WHEEL = (byte)0x80;
     public static final byte ONE_DOOR = (byte)0x40;
     public static final byte HAS_WINDSHIELD = (byte)0x01;
     private byte facialFeaturesParam;
     private byte carFeaturesParam;
     public MutantCar(byte facialFeaturesParam, byte partsFeaturesParam) {
          this.facialFeaturesParam = facialFeaturesParam;
          this.partsFeaturesParam = partsFeaturesParam;
          // Stuff
public class MutantCarMaker {
     public void make() {
          // Mutant car that has only eyes and one wheel.
          MutantCar mc = new MutantCar(MutantCar.HAS_EYES, MutantCar.ONE_WHEEL);
          // Mutant car with a nose, eyes, and only one door.
          MutantCar mc = new MutantCar(MutantCar.HAS_NOSE | MutantCar.HAS_EYES, MutantCar.ONE_DOOR);
          // Etc...
}This is just an example and as I've said earlier, I'll be writing lots of these classes. The good thing here is that all of them have some common behaviors, both the xxThing and xxMaker class. I'll just make a base abstract class and extend. My only dilemma is the darn parameters (eg. facialFeaturesParam, carFeaturesParam). One xxThing class can have as much 5 parameters(usually as byte) and have a completely different names for the bit flags for each byte. That's why the idea of a Parameter class came to mind. I'm having a hard time grasping EnumSet.
I guess what I want to do is just to make instantiating a xxMaker object more simple.
xxMaker xm = new xxMaker(xxMaker.BFLAGA1 | xxMaker.BFLAGA2 | xxMaker.BFLAGA3 | xxMaker.BFLAGA4,
                              xxMaker.BFLAGB1 | xxMaker.BFLAGB2 | xxMaker.BFLAGB3,
                              xxMaker.BLFAGC1 | xxMaker.BFLAGC2);Ugly isn't it? I just want to make this more cleaner and more structured.
So is my idea ok or is it totally off/unnecessary/stupid? How would any of you guys here do it? Or should I really get myself to use EnumSets?
Edited by: romainechester on Nov 15, 2007 6:28 PM
Edited by: romainechester on Nov 15, 2007 6:36 PM