I am trying to implement gwt editor framework.
I have created a driver as follows:
final Driver driver = GWT.create(Driver.class);
ABC is my class and I am passing object of my ABC class to
driver.edit();
function.
Now instead of class I want to use Interface.
But since we cant create instance of an interface how shall i proceed
for the same?
Can we use interfaces in above mentioned case ?
The Editor framework won't ever instantiate anything (other than its own internal things, of course), so using interfaces is safe, and just like with classes.
Try it, it just works.
Related
Hi I am trying to learn JAVA deeply and so I am digging into the JDK source code in the following lines:
URL url = new URL("http://www.google.com");
URLConnection tmpConn = url.openConnection();
I attached the source code and set the breakpoint at the second line and stepped into the code. I can see the code flow is: URL.openConnection() -> sun.net.www.protocol.http.Handler.openConnection()
I have two questions about this
First In URL.openConnection() the code is:
public URLConnection openConnection() throws java.io.IOException {
return handler.openConnection(this);
}
handler is an object of URLStreamHandler, define as blow
transient URLStreamHandler handler;
But URLStreamHandler is a abstract class and method openConnection() is not implement in it so when handler calls this method, it should go to find a subclass who implement this method, right? But there are a lot classes who implement this methods in sun.net.www.protocol (like http.Hanlder, ftp.Handler ) How should the code know which "openConnection" method it should call? In this example, this handler.openConnection() will go into http.Handler and it is correct. (if I set the url as ftp://www.google.com, it will go into ftp.Handler) I cannot understand the mechanism.
second. I have attached the source code so I can step into the JDK and see the variables but for many classes like sun.net.www.protocol.http.Handler, there are not source code in src.zip. I googled this class and there is source code online I can get but why they did not put it (and many other classes) in the src.zip? Where can I find a comprehensive version of source code?
Thanks!
First the easy part:
... I googled this class and there is source code online I can get but why they did not put it (and many other classes) in the src.zip?
Two reasons:
In the old days when the Java code base was proprietary, this was treated as secret-ish ... and not included in the src.zip. When they relicensed Java 6 under the GPL, they didn't bother to change this. (Don't know why. Ask Oracle.)
Because any code in the sun.* tree is officially "an implementation detail subject to change without notice". If they provided the code directly, it helps customers to ignore that advice. That could lead to more friction / bad press when customer code breaks as a result on an unannounced change to sun.* code.
Where can I find a comprehensive version of source code?
You can find it in the OpenJDK 6 / 7 / 8 repositories and associated download bundles:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk6/jdk6 - http://download.java.net/openjdk/jdk6/
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7 - http://download.java.net/openjdk/jdk7/
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8
Now for the part about "learning Java deeply".
First, I think you are probably going about this learning in a "suboptimal" fashion. Rather than reading the Java class library, I think you should be reading books on java and design patterns and writing code for yourself.
To the specifics:
But URLStreamHandler is a abstract class and method openConnection() is not implement in it so when handler calls this method, it should go to find a subclass who implement this method, right?
At the point that the handler calls than method, it is calling it on an instance of the subclass. So finding the right method is handled by the JVM ... just like any other polymorphic dispatch.
The tricky part is how you got the instance of the sun.net.www.protocol.* handler class. And that happens something like this:
When a URL object is created, it calls getURLStreamHandler(protocol) to obtain a handler instance.
The code for this method looks to see if the handler instance for the protocol already exists and returns that if it does.
Otherwise, it sees if a protocol handler factory exists, and if it does it uses that to create the handler instance. (The protocol handler factory object can be set by an application.)
Otherwise, searches a configurable list of Java packages to find a class whose FQN is package + "." + protocol + "." + "Handler", loads it, and uses reflection to create an instance. (Configuration is via a System property.)
The reference to handler is stored in the URL's handler field, and the URL construction continues.
So, later on, when you call openConnection() on the URL object, the method uses the Handler instance that is specific to the protocol of the URL to create the connection object.
The purpose of this complicated process is to support URL connections for an open-ended set of protocols, to allow applications to provide handlers for new protocols, and to substitute their own handlers for existing protocols, both statically and dynamically. (And the code is more complicated than I've described above because it has to cope with multiple threads.)
This is making use of a number of design patterns (Caches, Adapters, Factory Objects, and so on) together with Java specific stuff such as the system properties and reflection. But if you haven't read about and understood those design patterns, etcetera, you are unlikely to recognize them, and as a result you are likely to find the code totally bamboozling. Hence my advice above: learn the basics first!!
Take a look at URL.java. openConnection uses the URLStreamHandler that was previously set in the URL object itself.
The constructor calls getURLStreamHandler, which generates a class name dynamically and loads, and the instantiates, the appropriate class with the class loader.
But URLStreamHandler is a abstract class and method openConnection()
is not implement in it so when handler calls this method, it should go
to find a subclass who implement this method, right?
It has to be declared or abstract or implemented in URLStreamHandler. If you then give an instance of a class that extends URLStreamHandler with type URLStreamHandler and call the openConnection() method, it will call the one you have overriden in the instance of the class that extends URLStreamHandler if any, if none it will try to call the one in URLStreamHandler if implemented and else it will probably throw an exception or something.
I am trying to serialize a object in GWT using SerializationFactory, but I am not able to get it working. Here is the sample code of my POC:
import com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.SerializationException;
import com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.SerializationStreamFactory;
import com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.SerializationStreamReader;
import com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.SerializationStreamWriter;
...........
Some code here....
.........
......
SerializationStreamFactory factory = (SerializationStreamFactory) GWT.create(MyClass.class);
SerializationStreamWriter writer = factory.createStreamWriter();
try {
writer.writeObject(new MyClass("anirudh"));
String value = writer.toString();
SerializationStreamReader reader = factory.createStreamReader(value);
MyClass myObj = (MyClass) reader.readObject();
System.out.println(myObj.getName());
} catch (SerializationException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
It gave me the following exception
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: Deferred binding failed for 'com.anirudh..client.MyClass' (did you forget to inherit a required module?)
also in my code the class whose object I am trying to serialize implements IsSerializable
MyClass implements IsSerializable
I don't want to use GWT Auto-Bean framework because it does not fit my use case. Also I am not using GWT-RPC framework and right now I am quite adamant about using SerializationStreamFactory :D because I seriously want to know how this thing works.
Can anyone share a working example of SerializationStreamFactory or help me out pointing any mistake(s) I did.
Thanks in advance
SerializationStreamFactory factory = (SerializationStreamFactory) GWT.create(MyClass.class);
What are you expecting this line to do? GWT will attempt to find a replace-with or generate-with rule that matches this class (either when-type-assignable or when-type-is), or failing that will attempt to invoke a zero-arg constructor on MyClass, effectively new MyClass(). Is this what you are expecting?
The selected exception you've pasted suggests that MyClass may not be on the source path that GWT has been given to compile from, but the full error log will provide more information.
It looks as though you are trying to mimic the generated RPC code, where a *Async rpc interface would be implemented by code that extends from com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.impl.RemoteServiceProxy (which implements SerializationStreamFactory). That base implementation is extended further to initialize several fields such as the com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.impl.Serializer instance, actually responsible for serializing and deserializing object streams.
Serializers are created (by default) from the base class of com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.impl.SerializerBase, through the rebind class com.google.gwt.user.rebind.rpc.TypeSerializerCreator. If you've build your own generator for MyClass, you should be kicking this off to get the work done as ProxyCreator already should be doing.
Remember when building your own serialization/deserialization mechanism that you need to decide which types can be marshalled within this system - if you open it to all types, then you will need to generate FieldSerializer types for all possible objects on the source path. This will greatly expand the size of your compiled code.
If your main goal is learning how this 'magic' works, dig into the generators and associated code that live in the com.google.gwt.user.rebind.rpc package. There are other libraries that leverage these ideas such as the gwt-atmosphere project (see https://github.com/Atmosphere/atmosphere to get started). Also review the generated code that GWT creates when it builds a 'tradition' RPC interface.
I feel like using Dependency Injection is changing the way I write my object oriented code. For instance, below is what I would do without DI
Interface: DataAdapter
SqliteDataAdapter implements DataAdapter
XMLDataAdapter implements DataAdapter
OracleDataAdapter implements DataAdapter
// Initialization
DataAdapter adapter = new SqliteDataAdapter();
DataAdapter adapter = new XMLDataAdapter();
DataAdapter adapter = new OracleDataAdapter();
but using DI my code structure would be:
Interface: DataAdapter
SqliteDataAdapter implements ISqliteDataAdapter, DataAdapter
XMLDataAdapter implements IXMLDataAdapter, DataAdapter
OracleDataAdapter implements IOracleDataAdapter, DataAdapter
// Initialization
ISqliteDataAdapter adapter = new SqliteDataAdapter();
IXMLDataAdapter adapter = new XMLDataAdapter();
IOracleDataAdapter adapter = new OracleDataAdapter();
The reason for this change is that in my module I can bind 1 interface to 1 class.
Is this a bad practice? If yes what is the correct solution?
Doesn't DI change the whole purpose of using interfaces?
EDIT:
The following is my binding for DI container
bind(ISqliteDataAdapter.class).to(SqliteDataAdapter.class);
bind(IXMLDataAdapter.class).to(XMLDataAdapter.class);
bind(IOracleDataAdapter.class).to(OracleDataAdapter.class);
If i do as suggested, how would I be able to use multiple adapters? What if I need to use both XMLDataAdapter and SQLDataAdapter in my application?
bind(DataAdapter.class).to(SqliteDataAdapter.class);
Edit:
Here is the current call to get an instance:
#inject protected ISqliteDataAdapter dataAdapter;
Here is how I should do it with having 1 interface only:
#inject protected DataAdapter dataAdapter;
// In this case I don't have a choice on which type of data adapter It's going to create
// It's already defined in my module file and it's pointing to one of the 3 DataAdapters
So what I'm trying to understand is, how can I structure my code in a way that I have control over the type of object it's injecting, without having interface for every type of DataAdapter.
I would say that DI is a natural consequence of having interfaces. The reason we have interfaces is so that we can write code that doesn't depend on particular class, but instead an work with a multitude of classes without any changes. Even if we expect there to only be one class which does we need, this may change in the future. By programming to interface, we can even account for changes we can't imagine.
DI just uses the above notions in a peculiar way, to maximize the testability and adaptability of code. So I would say the DI is a really good practice.
That said, I think there is one warning to be issued for anyone involved with these kinds of systems. There's the danger that we write full-fledged classes like your SqliteDataAdaptor, and then push a "extract the interface" button to give the ISqliteDataAdaptor interface. This practice is very bad, particularly if it happens a lot. Instead, ISqliteDataAdaptor should usually be designed first, and then a sensible implementation can be written.
Dependency injection is about controlling what is instantiated and placing that logic in a single place. The code you write should not change the base types(interfaces) that you use.
In both cases you should have DataAdapter as the type of object you use. It's you who decides what the type of the instance that you get from the dependency injection container not the container.
also see this
I am new to using Mockito and I am running through an example test class written in our GWT project.
At some places ,in order to get a Mock we used Mockito.mock(SecurityDao.class)
but in other places in the same test class we instantiated other classes using the "new" keyword.
I think that in order to mock a class i need to pass in the interface as the parameter to Mockito.mock ,and if my class does not implement an interface then i need to use the "new" keyword to instantiate the class.
Is this correct?When should i really use Mockito.mock??
Thanks
Always use Mockito#mock() when creating an object other than that under test. Mockito can create mocks for interfaces and classes.
I'm experiencing some problems with GWT and Gilead/Hibernate
I did my code according to the tutorial but it fails with
com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.SerializationException: Type 'ru.atamur.entity.UserEntity_gilead_15' was not included in the set of types which can be serialized by this SerializationPolicy or its Class object could not be loaded. For security purposes, this type will not be serialized.: instance = ru.atamur.entity.UserEntity_gilead_15#133fa82
Looking at the source code I can see that Gilead transformed my UserEntity into UserEntity_gilead_15 inside GileadRPCHelper.parseReturnValue(returnValue, _beanManager)
I can see that this was deliberately done by ProxyClassMapper (I'm trying to use proxy mode), so I was wondering where Gilead was expecting to tell GWT Serilization mechanism about this new proxy class it introduced ...
Can you share your code ?
before that I want to say that SerializationException is thrown when your class doesn't implement isSerializable interface that you send it to the server.
Every class that you send to the server should implement isSerializable interface