Question abt multiple inheritance

why java does not support multiple inheritance

why java does not support multiple inheritanceThere's a very good book called the Java Programming Language by Gosling and others. I think it's in the 3rd edition. It's gives lot's of background information about the design choises made in Java.

Similar Messages

Question about multiple inheritance

Why does java not support multiple inheritance, but also give you the ability to use interfaces?
I've done a quick search on here which turned up the same thing as the books on java I've read - they tell me that java doesn't support multiple inheritance, and that it supports interfaces, but not why.
And from what I can see, the between multiple inheritance and single inheritance + interfaces make them seem almost equivalent, especially when you consider abstract classes. So why did the java designers make this decision?
Edit: Just to say I've never programmed in an OO language that supports multiple inheritance, so I've never had to deal with it. Also, single inheritance has never crippled any of my designs (not that there have been that many), I'm not whingeing, just asking.
Message was edited by:
Dross

Why does java not support multiple
inheritance, but also give you the ability to use
interfaces?It does support MI, just not MI of Implementation.
why.
class Beasty { }
class Horse extend Beasty {
public void gallop() { System.out.println( "horse" ); }
class Donkey extend Beasty {
public void gallop() { System.out.println( "donkey" ); }
class Mule extend House, Donkey {
Mule mule = new Mule();
mule.gallop();what would this print out.
MI of implementation makes life harder, but adds very little to the party. So why add it?

Problems of no multiple inheritance.

I have created two classes RECTANGLE with attributes Length and Height and PLANERECTANGLE, with various attributes required to specify the rectangle's center, an attribute that can be checked to see if it is inside an instance of rectangele. However, i am finding this following requirement difficult to understand.
In Question 5, we specified PlaneRectangle as a subclass of Rectangle. Suppose that we wanted the following generic behaviour to be implemented in a number of different �kinds of� shapes: being able to move a shape, check if a point is inside a shape, and check if another shape lies completely inside a specified instance of some shape. Java will not let us do this using multiple inheritance. How else could we specify this? Rewrite the Java code to illustrate use of this different method.
Thanks - Mark Costello.

The answer would be an interface
public interface Shape
public void moveShape();
public boolean containsPoint(int x, int y);
public boolean containsShape(Shape s);
Every shape class would then implement this interface:
public class Circle implements Shape
... and would need to implement those methods that
were specified (but not implemented) in the interface.

No multiple inheritance in Java. Interfaces used.

Hi,
In java a class can extend only one class while the interface can extend any number of interfaces.
Class extending only one class avoids multiple inheritance.
Can you explain me the reason of avoiding this in classes and allowing interfaces to extend any number of interfaces ?

Hi,
In java a class can extend only one class while the
interface can extend any number of interfaces.
Class extending only one class avoids multiple
inheritance.
Can you explain me the reason of avoiding this in
classes and allowing interfaces to extend any number
of interfaces ?The real question is: do you have a need for multiple inheritance?
If so, I would be glad to hear about this concrete problem.

Interfaces instead of multiple inheritance?

I've read that "The Java programming language does not permit multiple inheritance , but interfaces provide an alternative."
But I also read contradictory information-There are no method bodies in an interface.
Java interfaces only contain empty methods? Apparently, if I want to share a method among classes, I have to re-write the methods in each class that implements the interface. That doesn't seem at all like multiple inheritance. Am I missing something?
It seems that I will have to cut and paste the implementation code from one class to another, and if I change the methods, I have to cut and paste it all over again.
I've read that interfaces save a lot of time re-writing methods, but how?
Does this really provide the same capabilities as multiple inheritance, or am I missing something?
Thanks,
Pat

Pat-2112 wrote:
I've read that "The Java programming language does not permit multiple inheritance , but interfaces provide an alternative."
But I also read contradictory information-There are no method bodies in an interface. That's not contradictory.
Inheritance is about type, which interfaces provide. It is NOT about sharing code, which is all that's lacking by not having multiple inheritance of implementation.
Java interfaces only contain empty methods? Apparently, if I want to share a method among classes, I have to re-write the methods in each class that implements the interface. That doesn't seem at all like multiple inheritance. Am I missing something? Yup. You're missing the point of inheritance, and the fact that delegation allows you to use an implementation defined in one class in another class.
It seems that I will have to cut and paste the implementation code from one class to another, Nope.
public interface Cowboy {
void ride();
void draw();
public interface Artist {
void sculpt();
void draw();
public interface CowboyArtist extends Cowboy, Artist {
public class CowboyImpl implements Cowboy {
public void ride() {
   System.out.println("Giddyup!");
public void draw() {
    S.o.p("Bang!");
public class ArtistImpl implements Artist {
public void sculpt() {
    S.o.p("Demi Moore in Ghost. Yum!");
public void draw() {
    S.o.p("Sketch a picture of a gun.");
public class CowboyArtistImpl implements CowboyArtist { // or implements Cowboy, Artist
private final Cowboy cowboy = new CowboyImpl();
private final Artist artist = new AristImpl();
public void ride() {
    cowboy.ride();
public void sculpt() {
    artist.sculpt();
public void draw() { // uh-oh, what do we do here?
    artist.draw();
    cowboy.draw();
}The draw method is not relevant to this particular question. It's an example of one of the problems with MI, and I just included it since it usually comes up int these discussions anyway. Ride and sculpt demonstrate the point about delegation.

How does Java achieve multiple inheritance using interfaces

Java does not allow multiple inheritance through classes as classes might contain methods with same names. what happens if a class implements two interfaces with same method names?
I am really confused abt this? Can anybody help me out?
Message was edited by:
vijkris

yes to avoid the ambiguous functions which can result due to multiple inheritance of classes like in c++ , java doesn't have this through classes. But if you have same method (both return type and parameter) then java doesn't bother and it won't complain as ultimately only one implementation is possible in deriving class even though method declalaration is there in both the interfaces. If return type changes then it won't compile as it can't overide the both methods as they have same name and different return types. thats why inside interfaces they restricted the implementation of methods so that it can work fine in ambiguous scenarios.

Multiple-inheritance semantics

I saw the other day multiple-inheritance is possible with JavaFX classes.
class X extends Y,Z,A {
Something which is possible now as JavaFX classes don't have constructors. Now we can mix-in (as in Scala) code from other classes.
My question to the people who design this is about their intention: is it meant to be used as a composition ? Or still as a specialization like it is in Java.

If you allow multiple inheritance you get some ambiguities. Java avoid those by having single inheritance of implementation (one class may extend one class only) in addition to multiple inheritance of interfaces (that don't implement anything). This is much cleaner and that was one of Javas design objectives. The goal is to be safer than C++ and this often means leaving things out, like calls by reference, pointer arithmetics and multiple inheritance.

LDAP design question for multiple sites

LDAP design question for multiple sites
I'm planning to implement the Sun Java System Directory Server 5.2 2005Q1 for replacing the NIS.
Currently we have 3 sites with different NIS domains.
Since the NFS over the WAN connection is very unreliable, I would like to implement as follows:
1. 3 LDAP servers + replica for each sites.
2. Single username and password for every end user cross those 3 sites.
3. Different auto_master, auto_home and auto_local maps for three sites. So when user login to different site, the password is the same but the home directory is different (local).
So the questions are
1. Should I need to have 3 domains for LDAP?
2. If yes for question 1, then how can I keep the username password sync for three domains? If no for question 1, then what is the DIT (Directory Infrastructure Tree) or directory structure I should use?
3. How to make auto map work on LDAP as well as mount local home directory?
I really appreciate that some LDAP experta can light me up on this project.

Thanks for your information.
My current environment has 3 sites with 3 different NIS domainname: SiteA: A.com, SiteB:B.A.com, SiteC:C.A.com (A.com is our company domainname).
So everytime I add a new user account and I need to create on three NIS domains separately. Also, the password is out of sync if user change the password on one site.
I would like to migrate NIS to LDAP.
I want to have single username and password for each user on 3 sites. However, the home directory is on local NFS filer.
Say for userA, his home directory is /user/userA in passwd file/map. On location X, his home directory will mount FilerX:/vol/user/userA,
On location Y, userA's home directory will mount FilerY:/vol/user/userA.
So the mount drive is determined by auto_user map in NIS.
In other words, there will be 3 different auto_user maps in 3 different LDAP servers.
So userA login hostX in location X will mount home directory on local FilerX, and login hostY in location Y will mount home directory on local FilerY.
But the username and password will be the same on three sites.
That'd my goal.
Some LDAP expert suggest me the MMR (Multiple-Master-Replication). But I still no quite sure how to do MMR.
It would be appreciated if some LDAP guru can give me some guideline at start point.
Best wishes

More about multiple inheritance

OK, you can solve problems where multiple inheritance is needed by using interfaces. But im facing a problem where it cant help me. Im constructing a system where there are componentes that need to extend JTextField as well Observable. I dont have interfaces above it in the hierarchy to substitute multiple inheritance. What can I do?
When you have a scenario that you have to use two (or more) third party classes, and need to inherit from both, how do interfaces can help? If ate least I had multiple inheritance from classes...

<< Begin Rant >>
I have seen more inherited code that is terribly designed because multiple inheritence was available.
The example provided is a perfect example of this: At first blush, it seems easy to combine the UI and data components by combining Observable and JTextArea. If you were able to do this, the person inheriting your code in 3 years will curse your name.
Nothing pisses me off more (well, I'm sure there are other things, but...) than attempting to debug C++ source code and finding that function calls are being made to multiple super classes.
Here's a fun one: try adding an innocuous method getInfo() to a class you've inherited, only to find that someone uses getInfo() in one of the super-classes, and it has been declared as 'friend' because the design is piss poor and it was the only way they could make the function available. Now, I have to go on a goose chase searching for all the places in the entire type hierarchy that getInfo() is used and change the code to explicitly call the other base class.
It gets to the point where its easier to name it getInfo2() (like that's good design) and get on with things.
MI is evil, evil, evil in any environment where you are trying to have code re-use and multiple teams.
I find that most programmers who insist that multiple inheritence is a good thing just don't know how to use the Composite design pattern.
Sun's decision to not support MI in Java is a sound one: the result is code that can be easily read and understood.
<< End Rant >>
Whew... I feel much better having said that...
- K

Alternative for multiple inheritance (AbstractQueue and AbstractList)

Hello all,
What is the best alternative for multiple inheritance? I want to make a list, which supports queue operations. Both AbstractQueue en AbstractList are useful, so I would like to use them both, instead of implementing the methods myself or copying the code.
thanks

Do you mean you want a class just like LinkedList?
Why don't you look at the code for LinkedList. Perhaps you could even use it.
Most Queue methods have trivial implmentations using a List.
From the source for LinkedList
public class LinkedList<E>
extends AbstractSequentialList<E>
implements List<E>, Queue<E>, Cloneable, java.io.Serializable

How java support multiple inheritance by the use of interface.

As per my understanding, Interface is just having the signatures of the methods not the implementation.
So How java support multiple inheritance by the use of interface?
Answer 1: we can institate interface reference by its implemented
class.
          �� interface inf...
          �� class aa implements inf..
          �� class bb implements inf....
           Now, inf i = new aa();
           inf i = new bb();
Answer 2: We can extends as many interface as we want in the
single
           interface.
           i.e. interface infFirst....
           interface infSecond....
           interface infThird....
           Now ,
           interface ingMulti extends infFrist, infThird...
By above two answers its not prity clear as per the multiple inheritance in C or C++.
           i.e.
           class first{
           method abc();....}
           class second{
           method bbc()......}
           class multi::first::second{
           we can call to abc();.....as well as bbc();
-Please give your important suggstion on the same.(Hope I explain it well.)
-Jeff

The keyword implement is used only for interfaces not
for abstract class. If i am wrong correct me.I believe your right, but I will double check.
As for the multiple inheritence think about the following code:
class Animal {
    // Animal generic stuff in this class
interface Eat {
    // Generic stuff that models eating behavior
interface Runs {
    // generic methods that model running behavior
public class Horse extends Animal implements Eat, Runs {
    // Stuff specific to a horse
}The Animal class is generic but has stuff in it common to all animals.
The Eat interface models behavior that is generic to eating, all living things have to eat something to survive. Herbavore are different from carnivores.
The Runs interface models generic behavior to running, such as speed. A cheeta definately runs faster than a human.
This brings us to the Horse class. It extends the Animal class because it "is-a" animal, and it implements the eat and runs interface because they are behaviors a horse has.
I hope that helps.
Extending an abstract class is the same as extending a regular class with the exception you MUST override all abstract methods in the abstract class. Thats not too difficult but I believe when designing classes, designing an abstract can be more diffecult than modeling the base class, and generic behaviors in interfaces. JMO.
JJ

Multiple inheritance in tagging interface? Is it possible?

I saw a code somewhere that goes like this:
public interface Node extends Serializable, Clonable
...Is it possible? I know that Java doesn't allow multiple inheritance and that Serializable and Clonable are tagging interfaces where no method must be implemented by the programmer.

KamenRiderZX wrote:
I know that Java doesn't allow multiple inheritanceMore exactly: Java doesn't allow multiple inheritance of implementations. Inheriting multiple interfaces ("implements" for classes, "extends" for interfaces) is fine 'though.

Multiple Inheritance

Hello,
I have been programming Java for last year,
evolved in quite some skills with it, and
really think it is great...
However, I was shocked to find out that there
is no multiple inheritance feature.
I know it is rare, and my case proves it
(1 year now, I never needed it)
HOWEVER, when one needs multiple inheritance,
then they really do need it.
I have interfaces which I would like implemented
in their respective class (ie ISomething be
implemented in CSomething), then some classes
I need to implement many of those interfaces...
Now I am forced to have those classes extend
multiple interfaces, and duplicate the interface
implementation code inside each of them.
I dont mind a little bit of copy/paste, nor
do I care about the compiled classes being
slightly bigger, BUT the problem is that
when I need to change some behaviour in those
interfaces, in the near (or far) future, I will
have their implementation scattered in many
classes... This is dangerously error prone and
not proffesional at all... And I do not think
that including multiple inheritance in the language
could be more error prone than this...
I think the Java team does a 100% perfect brilliant
job, but at this specific point, they "over-tried"
to "protect" the programmers from themselves...
Well, thats all,
I think some next version of Java should support
multiple inheritance. And the Java "warning" could be :
"if you havent missed it till now, then you probably
do not need anyway, so do not bother using it just
because it exists"
Thanks for reading my thoughts,
Dimitris

Personally I never need multiple inheritance of code and I try to avoid inheritance of code whenever possible. A common mistake in OO is too use inheritance as a way of reusing code. Code reuse is much easier, cleaner and more powerful by using composition instead. Only use inheritance for polymorhism (to use multiple implementations for the same interface). An example:
interface A {
void ma();
void maa();
interface B {
void mb();
class C implements A, B {
private A a;
private A c;
private B b;
public void ma() {
    a.ma();
public void maa() {
    c.maa();
public void mb() {
    b.mb();
}This is much more powerful than code reuse through inheritance. In this example I use one method from 'a' and one method from 'c' when I implement interface A. I can change the value of 'a', 'b' and 'c' during runtime, and I dont have to reuse all the code in 'a' and 'b', I can select which code to reuse. This is the power of composition and interfaces. Note that I only access 'a', 'b' and 'c' through the interfaces A and B, never directly through their implementations.
I would recommend you to look at your design and start to think about interfaces and inheritance, not about code reuse though inheritance.

INF Looking for means to dialog C#-Dev team about multiple inheritance.

Please help.
I really need multiple inheritance with C#. Is there any forum/means to have a dialog with the dev's for C# about this? The amount of extra work and maintenance costs of not having multiple inheritance has been a big problem, but lately, it has really become
a burden for not having. The maintainability and reuse-ability of code is drastically reduced without it.

Btw, I think that this has been discussed
many times before. Almost once or twice each year since .NET is released (that's 12 years by now).
I don't think you can make them allow this feature as tons of example trying to convince them this is needed has been proved not necessary to use multiple inheritance by them.
Many of the discussions ends with something like "Java also does not support multiple inheritance but there isn't seems to be a problem for them". Maybe you can get more luck to convince Oracle to include MI in Java first.
Btw, I found it hard to believe you need Multiple Implementation Inheritance to... improve maintainability of code? WTF??? I think Multiple Implementation Inheritance has it own place in the hall of fame for the bugs it caused in languages that supports
it, even in C++.

Alternatives to multiple inheritance for my architecture (NPCs in a Realtime Strategy game)?

Coding isn't that hard actually. The hard part is to write code that makes sense, is readable and understandable. So I want to get a better developer and create some solid architecture.
So I want to do create an architecture for NPCs in a video-game. It is a Realtime
Strategy game like Starcraft, Age of Empires, Command & Conquers, etc etc.. So I'll have different kinds of NPCs. A NPC can have one to many abilities (methods) of these: Build(), Farm() and Attack().
Examples:
Worker can Build() and Farm()
Warrior can Attack()
Citizen can Build(), Farm() and Attack()
Fisherman can Farm() and Attack()
I hope everything is clear so far.
So now I do have my NPC Types and their abilities. But lets come to the technical / programmatical aspect.
What would be a good programmatic architecture for my different kinds of NPCs?
Okay I could have a base class. Actually I think this is a good way to stick with the DRY principle.
So I can have methods like WalkTo(x,y) in
my base class since every NPC will be able to move. But now lets come to the real problem. Where do I implement my abilities? (remember: Build(), Farm() and Attack())
Since the abilities will consists of the same logic it would be annoying / break DRY principle to implement them for each NPC (Worker,Warrior, ..).
Okay I could implement the abilities within the base class. This would require some kind of logic that verifies if a NPC can use ability X. IsBuilder, CanBuild,
.. I think it is clear what I want to express.
But I don't feel very well with this idea. This sounds like a bloated base class with too much functionality.
I do use C# as programming language. So multiple inheritance isn't an opinion here. Means: Having extra base classes like Fisherman
: Farmer, Attacker won't work.

Hi
PandoraElite，
You can inherit from multiple interfaces (and use explicit interface implementation), but not from classes in C#. You can almost simulate it:
In C# we don't support multiple inheritance
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/csharpfaq/archive/2004/03/07/why-doesn-t-c-support-multiple-inheritance.aspx
What would be a good programmatic architecture for my different kinds of NPCs?
In your scenario, we can define some interface ,An interface contains only the signatures of methods, properties, events or indexers. A class or struct that implements the interface must implement the members of the interface that are specified
in the interface definition.
How to use? Please refer to the following article.
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/18743/Interfaces-in-C-For-Beginners
Best of luck!
Kristin
We are trying to better understand customer views on social support experience, so your participation in this interview project would be greatly appreciated if you have time. Thanks for helping make community forums a great place.
Click
HERE to participate the survey.

Question abt multiple inheritance

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for