Attributes / member variables in interfaces?
I wish to know is there any way in which I can make it compulsory for the implementer class to declare the objects handles/primitives as they do with methods. for e.g.:
public interface Rectangle {
int height = 0;
int width = 0;
public int getHeight();
public int getWidth();
public void setHeight(int height);
public void setWidth(int width);
}
public class Tile implements Rectangle{
@Override
public int getHeight() {
return 0;
}
@Override
public int getWidth() {
return 0;
}
@Override
public void setHeight(int height) {
}
@Override
public void setWidth(int width) {
}
}
In the above method how can we compel Tile class to declare height and width attributes using the interface? For some reason I wish to do it with interface only!
I initially thought of using it with inheritance. But thing is I have to deal with 3 classes.!
- Rectangle
- Tile
- JLabel.!
class Tile extends JLabel implements Rectangle {}
would work.!
but
class Tile extends JLabel extends Rectangle {}
woud not.!
The point of an interface is to specify the public API. An interface has no state. Any variables that you create are really constants (so be careful about making mutable objects in interfaces).
Basically an interface says here are all of the methods that a class that implements it must support. It probably would have been better if the creators of Java had not allowed constants in interfaces, but too late to get rid of that now (and there are some cases where constants are sensible in interfaces).
Because you are just specifying what methods have to be implemented there is no idea of state (no instance variables). If you want to require that every class has a certain variable you need to use an abstract class.
Finally, you should, generally speaking, not use public variables, so the idea of putting variables into an interface is a bad idea to begin with.
Short answer - you can't do what you want because it is "wrong" in Java.
Edit:
class Tile
implements Rectangle
{
private int height;
private int width;
@Override
public int getHeight() {
return height;
}
@Override
public int getWidth() {
return width;
}
@Override
public void setHeight(int h) {
height = h;
}
@Override
public void setWidth(int w) {
width = w;
}
}
an alternative version would be:
abstract class AbstractRectangle
implements Rectangle
{
private int height;
private int width;
@Override
public int getHeight() {
return height;
}
@Override
public int getWidth() {
return width;
}
@Override
public void setHeight(int h) {
height = h;
}
@Override
public void setWidth(int w) {
width = w;
}
}
class Tile
extends AbstractRectangle
{
}
Interfaces cannot require instance variables to be defined -- only methods.
(Variables can be defined in interfaces, but they do not behave as might be expected: they are treated as final static
.)
Happy coding.
Java 8 introduced default methods for interfaces using which you can body to the methods. According to OOPs interfaces should act as contract between two systems/parties.
But still i found a way to achieve storing properties in the interface. I admit it is kinda ugly implementation.
import java.util.Map;
import java.util.WeakHashMap;
interface Rectangle
{
class Storage
{
private static final Map<Rectangle, Integer> heightMap = new WeakHashMap<>();
private static final Map<Rectangle, Integer> widthMap = new WeakHashMap<>();
}
default public int getHeight()
{
return Storage.heightMap.get(this);
}
default public int getWidth()
{
return Storage.widthMap.get(this);
}
default public void setHeight(int height)
{
Storage.heightMap.put(this, height);
}
default public void setWidth(int width)
{
Storage.widthMap.put(this, width);
}
}
This interface is ugly. For storing simple property it needed two hashmaps and each hashmap by default creates 16 entries by default. Additionally when real object is dereferenced JVM additionally need to remove this weak reference.
You can only do this with an abstract class, not with an interface.
Declare Rectangle
as an abstract class
instead of an interface
and declare the methods that must be implemented by the sub-class as public abstract
. Then class Tile
extends class Rectangle
and must implement the abstract methods from Rectangle
.
In Java you can't. Interface has to do with methods and signature, it does not have to do with the internal state of an object -- that is an implementation question. And this makes sense too -- I mean, simply because certain attributes exist, it does not mean that they have to be used by the implementing class. getHeight could actually point to the width variable (assuming that the implementer is a sadist).
(As a note -- this is not true of all languages, ActionScript allows for declaration of pseudo attributes, and I believe C# does too)