Java: Calling function from different classes - eclipse

I'm very new to Java which is required for a Blackberry App development project (which is what I'm doing now). My issue is that I am trying to use this class I found online (attached below) to implement a notification feature in my application. As I said I'm extremely new to Java so I don't know how to call the setVisible1 from another class, say UserInterface. I have tried MyAppIndicator._indicator.setVisible1(true,1); but this produces an error of:
"The method setVisible1(boolean, int) is undefined for the type ApplicationIndicator".
Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!
public class MyAppIndicator
{
public ApplicationIndicator _indicator;
public static MyAppIndicator _instance;
private MyAppIndicator () {}
public static MyAppIndicator getInstance() {
if (_instance == null) {
_instance = new MyAppIndicator ();
}
return(_instance);
}
public void setupIndicator() {
//Setup notification
if (_indicator == null) {
ApplicationIndicatorRegistry reg = ApplicationIndicatorRegistry.getInstance();
_indicator = reg.getApplicationIndicator();
if(_indicator == null) {
ApplicationIcon icon = new ApplicationIcon(EncodedImage.getEncodedImageResource ("status_icon_24x24.png"));
_indicator = reg.register(icon, false, true);
_indicator.setValue(0);
_indicator.setVisible(false);
}
}
}
public void setVisible1 (boolean visible, int count) {
if (_indicator != null) {
if (visible) {
_indicator.setVisible(true);
_indicator.setValue(count);
} else {
_indicator.setVisible(false);
}
}
}
}

In order to call methods from Classes in Java, you need instance of the class (or if the class is 'static' you can directly use the methods, as 'static' basically means only 1 instance).
In your case MyAppIndicator implements Singleton:
public static MyAppIndicator _instance;
private MyAppIndicator () {};
public static MyAppIndicator getInstance() {
if (_instance == null) {
_instance = new MyAppIndicator ();
}
return(_instance);
}
This means that when you call getInstance() it will return instance of MyAppIndicator
if such an instance already exists, or it will create a new one, if there's no instance.
After acquiring an instance of a class, you simply call it's methods, if they have the appropriate access modifiers. In your case setVisible1 has access modifier 'public' so you will be able to call it outside of MyAppIndicator.
So in code:
a) acquiring instance:
MyAppIndicator instanceOfMyAppIndicator = MyAppIndicator.getInstance();
b) calling the method:
instanceOfMyAppIndicator.setVisible1(true,1);

Looking at the above code, you should call
MyAppIndicator.getInstance().setVisible1(true,1);
than
MyAppIndicator._indicator.setVisible1(true,1);

You can do the following:
MyAppIndicator myAppIndicator = MyAppIndicator.getInstance();
myAppIndicator.setVisible1(true,1);

boolean visible = ...; // you need to set something here
int count = ...; // you need to set something, here
MyAppIndicator mai = MyAppIndicator.getInstance();
mai.setVisible1(visible, count);
setVisible1() is is a regular, public method, so any other class can invoke the method on an instance of the MyAppIndicator class.
you need to pass the same number & type of arguments to setVisible1() as are in its definition. The definition reads setVisible1(boolean visible, int count), so you need to pass a boolean and an integer. Java convention is that passing "true" will likely make the indicator visible, and "false" will hide it. The int is unusual, but reading the code it's ignored, so pass whatever you want.
to get an instance of a class, you normally write new ClassName. However, MyAppIndicator declares the constructor as private, so other classes cannot invoke it. Instead, myAppIndicator provides a getInstance() method that will handle object construction for you.
You should also read the Java Tutorial - they've got a far better description of all this.

Related

Flutter, when to use Factory fromJson and constructor fromJson

I've been struggling with this for a long time.
For sure, what I currently know is that you should use a factory or static fromJson when you need only one object and a Constructor named .fromJson when you need to create multiple instances.
So.. when?? when we need a one instance and when we need multiple instances??
I'm creating a model class for API response right now, and I'm deeply troubled about whether to use the factory or not.
Factory constructor allows returning already created instances. It allows us easily make singletons and multitones. From the call side, it looks like the usual constructor, but from inside implementation, it varies. Also, the factory constructor doesn't force you to return only one instance (object) as you stated. You can create as many as you need. It allows returning already created instances. That's the difference with an ordinary constructor that always returns a new instance. So this feature gives us some flexibility and in some cases performance improvements.
An example:
class Logger {
static Logger _instance;
Logger._() {
print('Logger created');
}
factory Logger() {
return _instance ??= Logger._();
}
void log(String msg) => print('${DateTime.now()}: $msg');
}
void main() {
A().initialize();
B().initialize();
}
class A {
Logger _logger;
void initialize() {
_logger = Logger();
_logger.log('A initialized');
}
}
class B {
Logger _logger;
void initialize() {
_logger = Logger();
_logger.log('B initialized');
}
}
If we run this code it will produce output like that:
Logger created
2021-09-27 21:59:23.887: A initialized
2021-09-27 21:59:23.887: B initialized
Where you can see that only one instance of Logger class has been created. Despite from calling side we've requested to create two instances.
In most cases, if your task it to create a modal class for API response an ordinary constructor with a static fromJson method is enough.

is it possible to put Class in a variable and access the class's static variables and functions in actionscript3?

Say I had the following class
public class Scene{
public static var title="new scene";
public function Scene(){}
public static function start() { trace("scene started"); }
}
How can you access the Scene class's static variables and functions like this?
var i:Class = Scene;
trace(i.title);
i.start();
I'm trying to figure out how variables assigned with Class work in actionscript.
Any tips would be welcome. Thanks.
Static methods are called from the class:
trace(Scene.title);
Scene.start();
Singleton patterns enable constructor, local reference, and potentially abstraction through interface classes.
Example of Scene as a singleton:
package
{
public class Scene
{
private static var instance:Scene = new Scene();
public static function getInstance():Scene
{
return instance;
}
public var title:String = "new scene";
public function Scene()
{
if (instance)
throw new Error("Scene is a singleton and can only be accessed through Scene.getInstance()");
}
public function start():void
{
trace("scene started.");
}
}
}
Your example implementation would now be:
var i:Scene = Scene.getInstance();
trace(i.title);
i.start();
This is how you can access the dynamic class (Scene) & it's properties / methods :
var myDynamicClasses:Array = [Scene]; // Required
var i:Class = Class(getDefinitionByName("Scene"));
trace(i.title);
i.start.call();
This could throw an error, if the first line is not included. Because, when the compiler notices the class Scene (not the one from adobe's package) is not being used it ignores it. Thus it would be not available for dynamic initialization.
We could force the compiler to include these classes by putting these class names in variables or declare an array as above as a quick hack.
If you have many dynamic classes, you could add a reference to them in this array & each class will be included by the compiler for dynamic initialization.
var i:Class = Scene;
trace(i.title);
Should throw an error because the compiler can no longer assume that i is a scene when it gets to line 2. If you were to coerce the Class object, it should work.
var i:Class = Scene;
trace((Scene(Class).title);

How do I mock Class<? extends List> myVar in Mockito?

I want to mock a Class in Mockito. It will then have a .newInstance() call issued which will be expected to return an actual class instance (and will return a mock in my case).
If it was setup correctly then I could do:
ArrayList myListMock = mock(ArrayList.class);
when(myVar.newInstance()).thenReturn(myListMock);
I know I can set it up so that a new instance of class ArrayList will be a mock (using PowerMockito whenNew), just wondering if there was a way to mock this kind of a class object so I don't have to override instance creation...
Below is the real class I'm trying to mock, I can't change the structure it is defined by the interface. What I'm looking for is a way to provide cvs when initialize is called.
public class InputConstraintValidator
implements ConstraintValidator<InputValidation, StringWrapper> {
Class<? extends SafeString> cvs;
public void initialize(InputValidation constraintAnnotation) {
cvs = constraintAnnotation.inputValidator();
}
public boolean isValid(StringWrapper value,
ConstraintValidatorContext context) {
SafeString instance;
try {
instance = cvs.newInstance();
} catch (InstantiationException e) {
return false;
} catch (IllegalAccessException e) {
return false;
}
}
Mockito is designed exclusively for mocking instances of objects. Under the hood, the mock method actually creates a proxy that receives calls to all non-final methods, and logs and stubs those calls as needed. There's no good way to use Mockito to replace a function on the Class object itself. This leaves you with a few options:
I don't have experience with PowerMock but it seems it's designed for mocking static methods.
In dependency-injection style, make your static factory method into a factory instance. Since it looks like you're not actually working with ArrayList, let's say your class is FooBar instead:
class FooBar {
static class Factory {
static FooBar instance;
FooBar getInstance() {
if (instance == null) {
instance = new FooBar();
}
return instance;
}
}
// ...
}
Now your class user can receive a new FooBar.Factory() parameter, which creates your real FooBar in singleton style (hopefully better and more threadsafe than my simple implementation), and you can use pure Mockito to mock the Factory. If this looks like it's a lot of boilerplate, it's because it is, but if you are thinking of switching to a DI solution like Guice you can cut down a lot of it.
Consider making a field or method package-private or protected and documenting that it's visible for testing purposes. Then you can insert a mocked instance in test code only.
public class InputConstraintValidator implements
ConstraintValidator<InputValidation, StringWrapper> {
Class<? extends SafeString> cvs;
public void initialize(InputValidation constraintAnnotation) {
cvs = constraintAnnotation.inputValidator();
}
public boolean isValid(StringWrapper value,
ConstraintValidatorContext context) {
SafeString instance;
try {
instance = getCvsInstance();
} catch (InstantiationException e) {
return false;
} catch (IllegalAccessException e) {
return false;
}
}
#VisibleForTesting protected getCvsInstance()
throws InstantiationException, IllegalAccessException {
return cvs.newInstance();
}
}
public class InputConstaintValidatorTest {
#Test public void testWithMockCvs() {
final SafeString cvs = mock(SafeString.class);
InputConstraintValidator validator = new InputConstraintValidator() {
#Override protected getCvsInstance() {
return cvs;
}
}
// test
}
}
I think you just need to introduce an additional mock for Class:
ArrayList<?> myListMock = mock(ArrayList.class);
Class<ArrayList> clazz = mock(Class.class);
when(clazz.newInstance()).thenReturn(myListMock);
Of course the trick is making sure your mocked clazz.newInstance() doesn't end up getting called all over the place because due to type-erasure you can't specify that it's actually a Class<ArrayList>.
Also, be careful defining your own mock for something as fundamental as ArrayList - generally I'd use a "real one" and populate it with mocks.

Satisfy Imports in custom ExportProvider

I'd like to know how I can have Imports in my custom ExportProvider. Here's an example of what I'm trying to do:
public class MyExportProvider : ExportProvider
{
private List<Export> _exports;
[Import()]
private IConfig _config;
public MyExportProvider()
base()
{
_exports = new List<Export>();
}
protected override IEnumerable<Export> GetExportsCore(ImportDefinition definition,
AtomicComposition composition)
{
if (!_exports.Any())
Initialize();
return _exports.Where(x => definition.IsConstraintSatisfiedBy(s.Definition);
}
private void Initialize()
{
var contractName = typeof(MyObject).FullName;
var exportDefinition = new ExportDefinition(contractName, null);
var export = new Export(exportDefinition, () => new MyObject(_config));
_exports.Add(export);
}
}
I am adding the provider when I create the CompositionContainer.
Unfortunately, the import is never satisfied. I can see this by setting AllowDefaults = true so my provider is created, but _config is always null.
How can I configure the container and/or provider so the Import will be satisfied?
When you are adding your export provider you are still creating your composition container. Thus I don't see how you can use the not yet created composition container to import parts of your custom export provider.
What I would do is first create a temporary CompositionContainer that will be used to create MyExportProvider.
Afterwards use the MyExportProvider to create your second final CompositionContainer that will be used by the rest of the application.
EDIT:
// this is your real container, only shown here for reference
CompositionContainer container;
public void BootstrapContainerMethod()
{
// Replace this part with the catalogs required to create your export provider.
var catalog = new AggregateCatalog();
catalog.Catalogs.Add(new DirectoryCatalog("./bin", "*.dll"));
// Your temporary container, declared here in local scope
// will be disposed because of using
using (var bootstrapContainer = new CompositionContainer(catalog))
{
var myExportProvider = bootstrapContainer.GetExportedValue<IMyExportProvider>();
// create your real container and optionnally add catalogs (not shown here)
container = new CompositionContainer(myExportProvider);
}
}
You might also consider the problem from another angle. Do you really need to have imports in your custom ExportProvider? I do not know your requirements, but maybe you can make do without having imports.
As an alternative to the dual CompositionContainer solution, you could wire this up in a single export provider, and have it compose itself using the same container. As an example, I've defined the following contract and it's export:
public interface ILogger
{
void Log(string message);
}
[Export(typeof(ILogger))]
public class ConsoleLogger : ILogger
{
public void Log(string message)
{
Console.WriteLine(message);
}
}
And with my example ExportProvider, I expect to be able to import an instance of it:
public class TestExportProvider : ExportProvider
{
private readonly object _lock = new object();
private bool _initialised;
[Import]
public ILogger Logger { get; set; }
public void SetCompositionService(ICompositionService service)
{
if (service == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("service");
lock (_lock)
{
if (!_initialised)
{
InitialiseProvider(service);
}
}
}
private void InitialiseProvider(ICompositionService service)
{
service.SatisfyImportsOnce(this);
_initialised = true;
}
protected override IEnumerable<Export> GetExportsCore(ImportDefinition definition, AtomicComposition atomicComposition)
{
if (_initialised)
{
Logger.Log("Getting available exports for '" + definition.ContractName + "'");
// Do work here.);
return Enumerable.Empty<Export>();
}
return Enumerable.Empty<Export>();
}
}
I provide an instance of an ICompositionService, which CompositionContainer implements, and I perform a first-time initialisation when I call SetCompositionService. It checks to see if it has already been initialised, and if not, goes ahead and calls the SatisfyImportsOnce method on itself.
We would wire this up, something like this:
// Build our catalog.
var catalog = new AssemblyCatalog(typeof(Program).Assembly);
// Create our provider.
var provider = new TestExportProvider();
// Create our container.
var container = new CompositionContainer(catalog, provider);
// Register the composition service to satisfy it's own imports.
provider.SetCompositionService(container);
Obviously you wouldn't be able to use any imports and your ExportProvider will explicitly create for you, but for everything else, it should work.

How to call java method from javascript method that located within another jsni method

public class A{
private void javaMethod(int a,int b){}
private native void init()/*-{
function OnMouseMove(e) {
//blow calling doesn't work
this.#p::javaMethod(Ljava/...teger;Ljava.../Integer;)(intVal,intVal);
}
}-*/;
}
As described above,how to make that invoking work?
Answered on the Google Group: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/qE2-L4u_t4s/YqjOu-bUfsAJ
Copied here for reference and convenience:
First, int is not java.lang.Integer, so your method signature in JSNI is wrong; it should read javaMethod(II).
(I suppose the #p:: while javaMethod is defined in class A is over-simplification in your question, but is OK in your code)
You'll also probably have a problem with this, that might not be what you think it is. A common pattern is to assign the current object (this, at the time) to a variable that you'll reference from your closure:
var that = this;
…
function OnMouseMove(e) {
that.#p.A::javaMethod(II)(intVal, intVal);
}
You're doing two things wrong:
You're not defining the class name after #p, (assuming #p is actually just a shortened version of the real package's name);
You're attempting to pass java.lang.Integer in place of int. You should be saying (II) as the types, as described here.
Your code should look more like this:
package com.my.package;
public class ClassA {
private static void javaMethod(int a, int b) { ... }
public static native void init() /*-{
$wnd.javaMethod = function(a, b) {
return #com.my.package.ClassA::javaMethod(II)(a,b);
}
function OnMouseMove(e) {
$wnd.javaMethod(a,b);
}
}-*/;
}