Calling one specific overriden method in all derived classes - c#-4.0

Consider the following code:
// ======== Abstract class ========
public abstract class Creatures {
public abstract void loseEnergy();
public void execute()
{
loseEnergy();
}
}
// ======== Animals ========
public class Animals : Creatures
{
public override void loseEnergy(){}
}
public class Birds : Animals
{
public override void loseEnergy(){}
}
// ======== Human ========
public class Human : Creatures
{
public override void loseEnergy(){}
}
public class Male : Human
{
public override void loseEnergy(){}
}
public class Female : Human
{
public override void loseEnergy(){}
}
[ This code was based on the code by Jayson suggested here: "Base class methods calling derived class methods ?" ]
In the given code example, I would like to have the runtime executing EACH derived class object's certain method, in this case, which is 'loseEnergy()', however, I could not find the solution.
How do I approach this problem?
What can be useful to know or to try.. in order to solve this issue?
Your help is very much appreciated!
Thank you!
Kind regards,
Segara
P.S. Some search I have done so far:
"How to call overriden methods in all derived classes"
"Collection of derived classes that have generic base class"
"How to call derived function using base class object"
"Call method of the derived class through reflection possible or no"
EDIT:
I decided to stick to the idea I had before which is to have some list that would contain the objects of the classes that have 'loseEnergy()' method. Having such list I will be able to call every object's method 'loseEnergy()', which is what I wanted.
Question can be closed.
Thank you.

I didn't really understand your problem but anyway i can try to give you some means to use abstract classes :
If you use a abstract method, you SHOULD override it in a subclasses (like a method declared in an interface)
If you want that all inherited class use a same method, you can implement it in the abstract class ; all subclasses will use the method you implements if you don't override it, you've have to not declare it in the subclasses (extends < ABS_CLASS > is good enough)
If you want use a method of the abstract class which is override in the sub class you can use the keyword super .
I hope it will help you.

if you mean that you want the calls: female.loseEnergy() -> human.loseEnergy() -> creature.loseEnergy(), call the base method in the first line of the overriden one
public class Female : Human
{
public override void loseEnergy()
{
base.loseEnergy();
// do stuff
}
}

In the Greenfoot environment that you mention in the post above, the act() method is called only on actors which have been added into the "world". Internally, this adds them into a list. The simulation process iterates through the list and calls act() on each object in turn. Objects that are not "in the world" are not known to the system and so do not have their act method called. There is no magic here going on here.
If you wanted similar behaviour but without manually adding objects into a list, you could possibly have the base class constructor add new objects into a global list. I don't know C# so I don't know precisely how to do this, but I cannot imagine it would be difficult.

Related

Override BQL used for PXProjection on SOShipmentPlan

I have a need to override the Select statement being used for the SOShipmentPlan PXProjection/DAC, namely, removing the
And <INPlanType.isFixed, Equal<boolFalse>
condition.
I can override all of the CreateShipment() logic and bring in any other necessary routines into an SOShipmentEntry_Extension class, to the point where I finally can use my own version of a SOShipmentPlan class, but that all seems needlessly complex when all I want to do is override the select for the PXProjection attribute. Overriding CreateShipment() and supporting routines also seems like a quick way to get in trouble come time for upgrades.
So, is there an easy way to override the PXProjection's BQL, or am I stuck overriding all kinds of code?
UPDATE 1
Based on a link provided below (stackoverflow.com/a/41540659/7376238), I feel like I'm close. Here's the block of code I end up with:
namespace PX.Objects.SO
{
public class SOShipmentEntry_Extension : PXGraphExtension<SOShipmentEntry>
{
#region Event Handlers
#endregion
[Serializable]
[PXProjection(typeof(Select2<SOOrder,
InnerJoin<SOOrderType, On<SOOrder.FK.OrderType>,
InnerJoin<INItemPlan, On<INItemPlan.refNoteID, Equal<SOOrder.noteID>>,
InnerJoin<INPlanType, On<INItemPlan.FK.PlanType>>>>,
Where<INItemPlan.hold, Equal<boolFalse>,
And<INItemPlan.planQty, Greater<decimal0>,
And<INPlanType.isDemand, Equal<boolTrue>,
And<INPlanType.isForDate, Equal<boolTrue>,
And<Where<INItemPlan.fixedSource, IsNull,
Or<INItemPlan.fixedSource, NotEqual<INReplenishmentSource.transfer>>>>>>>>>))]
[PXSubstitute()]
public partial class SOShipmentPlanCst : SOShipmentPlan
{
int x = 0;
}
}
But it doesn't seem to work. Not sure of where I'm supposed to put the code. I've tried putting the class definition inside and outside of public class SOShipmentEntry_Extension : PXGraphExtension<SOShipmentEntry> class (currently inside the extension class as shown). No luck either way.
THIS ANSWER DIDN'T WORK
Fair warning... I have not done this to a PXProjection before, so you'll have to see if this works. The nature of extensions tends to allow overriding views by simply redefining them. I have not done this myself with a projection, but I suspect it will be similar. Give it a try and see if you get the desired results. All I can say about testing it is that "it compiled" when I added to my project and removed the INItemPLanType.isFixed condition.
public class SOShipmentEntry_Extension : PXGraphExtension<SOShipmentEntry>
{
[PXProjection(typeof(Select2<SOOrder,
InnerJoin<SOOrderType, On<SOOrder.FK.OrderType>,
InnerJoin<INItemPlan, On<INItemPlan.refNoteID, Equal<SOOrder.noteID>>,
InnerJoin<INPlanType, On<INItemPlan.FK.PlanType>>>>,
Where<INItemPlan.hold, Equal<boolFalse>,
And<INItemPlan.planQty, Greater<decimal0>,
And<INPlanType.isDemand, Equal<boolTrue>,
And<INPlanType.isForDate, Equal<boolTrue>,
And<Where<INItemPlan.fixedSource, IsNull, Or<INItemPlan.fixedSource, NotEqual<INReplenishmentSource.transfer>>>>>>>>>))]
public partial class SOShipmentPlan : IBqlTable { }
}

UML class diagram for static variable from other class

As I know, if the static method from other class, we may interpret their relationship with dependency, just like the answer from How to show usage of static methods UML Class Diagram
However, how about for the static variable from other class? Is it the similar case; using dependancy?
For example,
class A{
public static String CHAR="Charecter";
public static String INT="Integer";
public static String STR="String";
}
class B{
public String Type;
public B(){
Type=STR;
}
public void B(String t){
Type=t;
}
}
would it result in the uml class diagram as below?
Note that although I would rather use enumeration in real life for this case, I just would like to know how it works.
Yes, this is similar.
Dependency shows that one class is "aware" of some other class and uses it in some way (or more generally depends on it). It can for instance refer to (public) static attributes, static operations and so on.

How to use JAXB with PropertyChangeSupport?

I am trying to use JAXB in an Eclipse project. View widgets are bound to model attributes with java.beans.PropertyChangeSupport. This works fine. I want to also bind model attributes to a persistent XML representation on disk with JAXB. I can marshal important state to XML and can unmarshal that back into a pojo/bean thing at runtime but am not sure how best to proceed.
The bean setters bound to my view widgets need to firePropertyChange() but XJC generates only simple setters, this.value = value.
XJC properties are protected, so it looks like I could override its setters to firePropertyChange(), but I don't know how my overriding subclass could have its unmarshaled superclass magically change state at runtime (like when user requests report for different year which is when I would unmarshal a different XML file).
Is there an example or pattern for doing this? Surely it is not new. Many thanks. -d
#Adam Thanks! I grokked a workable solution with this:
public class MyBean extends JaxBean {
public JaxBean getJaxBean() {
return this;
}
public void setJaxBean(JaxBean jaxBean) {
super.setThis(jaxBean.getThis());
super.setThat(jaxBean.getThat());
// etc...
}
public MyBean() {
// etc...
}
}
I think my confusion was thinking the unmarshalled bean would somehow magically replace my working instance. The solution above requires additional text but it works and the use of JaxBean's dumb setters avoids firing events unnecessarily when loading a new XML.
Your solution, annotating MyBean with JAXB and using schemagen, sounds even better. I will try that next go around. These are very nice technologies. -d
I mentioned another approach to your application in my comment.
It's what we use in our RCP application. Except that we marshall/unmarshall through network thus we use JAXWS and not just JAXB.
I'm somewhat experienced with this kind of stack, so here's a kick-starter for you:
/**
* Your UI POJO-s should extend this class.
*/
public abstract class UIModel<T extends UIModel> {
protected final PropertyChangeSupport propertyChangeSupport = new PropertyChangeSupport(this);
/**
* This comes handy at times
*/
public void afterUnmarshal(Unmarshaller unmarshaller, Object parent) {
//....
}
/**
* And this too, trust me.
*/
public void deepCopy(final T of) {
removePropertyChangeListener(propertyChangeListener);
//It's from Spring Framework but you can write your own. Spring is a fat-ass payload for a Java-SE application.
BeanUtils.copyProperties(of, this, IGNORED_ON_CLIENT);
addPropertyChangeListener(propertyChangeListener);
}
}
public void addPropertyChangeListener(String propertyName, PropertyChangeListener listener) {
propertyChangeSupport.addPropertyChangeListener(propertyName, listener);
}
public void removePropertyChangeListener(PropertyChangeListener listener) {
propertyChangeSupport.removePropertyChangeListener(listener);
}
}
/**
* Example of a UI POJO.
*/
public class Car extends UIModel<Car> {
private String make;
private int numberOfWheels;
//... etc.
/**
* Example of a setter
*/
public void setMake(String make) {
propertyChangeSupport.firePropertyChange("make", this.make, this.make = make);
}
public String getMake() {
return make;
}
//... etc.
}
I don't know how often your Schema-definition changes but there's a pattern supporting this;
/**
* New application (compiled with the class below) can open a file saved by the old application.
*/
public class Car2 extends Car {
private String fuelType; // Example of a new field
public void setFuelType(String fuelType) {
propertyChangeSupport.firePropertyChange("fuelType", this.fuelType, this.fuelType = fuelType);
}
//... etc.
}
This way the old application can open XML-outputs of the new. Dropping a field from such a class's source code will result in a RuntimeException as JAXB is still looking for it.
If you're clients are always up-to-date then you should not care about this at all.
When tackling with Java collections and subclassing excessively you will run into JAXB problems which you can solve by Googling #XmlRootElement and #XmlSeeAlso annotations.
Comments don't format, trying "answer". Need to do the stackoverflow tour. Continuing,
Thanks, Adam, I will bookmark these for future reference. They look similar to my example, the pattern is (unmarshal New, be quiet, copy New to Old, be noisy). I like the mind-bending recursion,
class UIModel<T extends UIModel>
class Car extends UIModel<Car>
and assume you've tested it compiles. ;)
Regards, -d.

Class to inherit the constructor of its base class

I would like to know if I can access the constructor of the base class in its derived classes in C#. If yes please let me know how could we make it. Thanks in advance.
You can call the base class constructor as part of the execution of the derived class constructor
public MyBase
{
public MyBase() { }
}
public Derived
{
public Derived() : base() { }
}
When using this pattern, you are said to be using the base class initializer.
For more background, see the base keyword and instance constructors on MSDN.

Is it possible to call default implementations of interfaces with Mockito's doCallRealMethod?

Suppose I have the following interface:
public interface ISomething {
default int doStuff() {
return 2 * getValue();
}
int getValue();
}
When I now mock this interface like this:
#Mock
private ISomething _something;
#Before
public void setup() {
doCallRealMethod().when(_something).doStuff();
}
and try to test the doStuff() method like the following:
#Test
public void testDoStuff() {
when(_something.getValue()).thenReturn(42);
assertThat("doStuff() returns 84", _something.doStuff(), is(84));
}
I expect the test to succeed, but I get:
org.mockito.exceptions.base.MockitoException:
Cannot call real method on java interface. Interface does not have any implementation!
Calling real methods is only possible when mocking concrete classes.
I tried subclassing ISomething with an abstract class like this:
public abstract class Something implements ISomething {
}
and mock this class like above. With this approach, I get the same.
Does Mockito not support calling default implementations?
That's correct. The current version of Mockito doesn't support this. You could raise a feature request here. Do note that it seems to be related to issue 456 which was fixed in release 1.10.0, so please make sure you test this in the latest version first.
I was working on a project using Mockito 1.9.5 and ran into the same issue that you found. We couldn't upgrade Mockito because of the way our build server worked. The problem we ran into was when we were writing unit tests for the concrete subclasses, as we couldn't stub out or include the default methods from the interface in our mock objects (so slightly different from your example).
Here is an example subclass using your model:
public class ConcreteSomething implements ISomething {
#Override
int getValue()
{
return 42;
}
}
Then in the unit test class, we explicitly made a private inner class. This class overrode all the default methods of the concrete class under test (i.e. ConcreteSomething) with the interface's default implementation. So in this example, something like:
private class ConcreteSomethingDefaultImpl extends ConcreteSomething {
#Override
int doStuff() {
return super.doStuff();
}
}
For us, a mock made using mock(ConcreteSomething.class) couldn't have it's default methods called using doCallRealMethod(), but mock(ConcreteSomethingDefaultImpl.class) could, and more importantly, it was the default implementation code in the interface that was being used.
I hope that helps anyone else who is constrained to use a particular version of Mockito.

Resources