Why is v.v accessible if MyTest is not a parent-class of Val?  public class MyTest  {     public static void main (String args [])     {         ValX v = new ValX ();         System.out.println ("A: " + v.v);  // is working, why?     } }   public class ValX extends Val { }   public class Val  {     protected float v = 11; }   EDIT  I learned about the visibility of proteced within the package. Thats the reason. thanks!  Is there a way I can make v only visible to parent-classes without moving it to another package?
414
In Java, are there clear rules on when to use each of access modifiers, namely the default (package private), public, protected and private, while making class and interface and dealing with inheritance?
71027
The following code fails to compile stating  "A local variable named 'st' cannot be declared in this scope because it would give a different meaning to 'st', which is already used in a 'child' scope to denote something else":           var l = new List&lt;string&gt;();         l.Find(st =&gt; st.EndsWith("12"));         string st = "why this fails?";   I understand why this won't work:          string preParent = "";         {             string preParent = "Should fail cause we change the meaning";         }   When we do the following we get "CS0103: The name 'postParent' does not exist in the current context":          {             string postParent=string.Empty;         }         postParent = "Should this work?";   What I don't get is why is the compiler smart enough to see that postParent is not within scope, but won't let me define a new variable that has the same name as a variable used within a child scope (which is obviously out of scope at this point).   Is the compiler simple enforcing scope by refusing to let me use the variable? If so this makes sense.  ===========  Edited:   I guess what I also find interesting is how you can have the same variable within two child scopes in a single method, so this is valid:          {             string thisWorks= string.Empty;         }         {             string thisWorks= "Should this work?";         }   I'm just a little curious that you can have two variables with the same name as long as they are at the same level (if you look at scope as a tree). This makes sense because you can have local variables in two methods of the same class with the same name.   I'm just surprised that the compiler is able to differentiate and allow this, while it wouldn't allow the postParent variable. And is this a technical limitation or was this a design decision? That's what I'm really trying to get at;-)
91389
I can't seem to access instance members of the surrounding class from inside an enum, as I could from inside an inner class. Does that mean enums are static? Is there any access to the scope of the surrounding class's instance, or do I have to pass the instance into the enum's method where I need it?  public class Universe {     public final int theAnswer;      public enum Planet {         // ...         EARTH(...);         // ...          // ... constructor etc.          public int deepThought() {             // -&gt; "No enclosing instance of type 'Universe' is accessible in this scope"             return Universe.this.theAnswer;         }     }      public Universe(int locallyUniversalAnswer) {         this.theAnswer = locallyUniversalAnswer;     } }
58964
I have a class with two class methods (using the classmethod() function) for getting and setting what is essentially a static variable.  I tried to use the property() function with these, but it results in an error.  I was able to reproduce the error with the following in the interpreter: class Foo(object):     _var = 5     @classmethod     def getvar(cls):         return cls._var     @classmethod     def setvar(cls, value):         cls._var = value     var = property(getvar, setvar)  I can demonstrate the class methods, but they don't work as properties: &gt;&gt;&gt; f = Foo() &gt;&gt;&gt; f.getvar() 5 &gt;&gt;&gt; f.setvar(4) &gt;&gt;&gt; f.getvar() 4 &gt;&gt;&gt; f.var Traceback (most recent call last):   File &quot;&lt;stdin&gt;&quot;, line 1, in ? TypeError: 'classmethod' object is not callable &gt;&gt;&gt; f.var=5 Traceback (most recent call last):   File &quot;&lt;stdin&gt;&quot;, line 1, in ? TypeError: 'classmethod' object is not callable  Is it possible to use the property() function with @classmethod decorated functions?
1624
The very common beginner mistake is when you try to use a class property "statically" without making an instance of that class. It leaves you with the mentioned error message:     You can either make the non static method static or make an instance of that class to use its properties.   Why? I am not asking for solutions. I would be grateful to know what is the reason behind it. The very core reason!  private java.util.List&lt;String&gt; someMethod(){     /* Some Code */     return someList;             }  public static void main(String[] strArgs){                // The following statement causes the error. You know why..     java.util.List&lt;String&gt; someList = someMethod();          }
49686
Sometimes when I am debugging code in Eclipse it happens that although I can see and inspect class member variables without any difficulty I am unable to inspect the values of variables declared locally within functions. As an aside, any parameters to the current function lose their 'real' names and instead one sees their values listed in the Variables window as arg0, arg1, arg2, etc but at least the values are visible.  This is occurring at present in relation to classes defined within the core JDK. I have verified that the installed and current JRE is a JDK.  Is anybody able to shed some light on this behaviour?
36051
class Test {        bool isVal() const {           return isVal;       }    private:        bool isVal; };   On Compiling this file it says      testClass.cpp:9: declaration of `bool   Test::isVal'      testClass.cpp:3: conflicts with   previous declaration `bool   Test::isVal()'   Although the same would work for java   class Test {    private boolean isVal;    public boolean isVal() {       return isVal;   }  }   Why does the compile error occur in C++ not in Java?
929
I would like to be able to write a Java class in one package which can access non-public methods of a class in another package without having to make it a subclass of the other class. Is this possible?
23909
Looking for reviewers to suggest optimization and improvements, and to evaluate coding practices.  final class Variables {     private final int x;     private final int y;      Variables(int x2, int y2) {         this.x = x2;         this.y = y2;     }      public int getX() {         return x;     }      public int getY() {         return y;     }      @Override public String toString()  {          return "x = " + x + " y = " + y;     } }  public final class FindMissing {      private FindMissing() {};      /**  * Takes an input a sorted array with two variables that repeat in the  * range. Remaining variable are consecutive. and returns two variables that repeats  *   * eg: for a range of 1,2,3,4, a valid input is [1, 4], [1, 3] etc.  *   * @param a : the sorted array.  */ /*  * Why is start needed ?  * If start is not given then if a1 is empty how do we know if missing numbers were  * [1, 2] or [4, 5] ??.   */ public static Variables sortedConsecutiveTwoMissing (int[] a, int startOfRange) {     if (a == null) throw new NullPointerException("a1 cannot be null. ");      int low = startOfRange;     // calculating the highest value of the range. it needs to be 2 more than length since all elememts are consecutive.     int high = startOfRange + (a.length - 1) + 2;      int i = 0;     boolean foundX = false;     int x = 0;       while (i &lt; a.length) {         if (a[i] != low) {             if (foundX) {                 return new Variables(x, low);             } else {                 x = low;                 foundX = true;             }         } else {             i++;         }         low++;     }      return new Variables(x, high);  }  public static void main(String[] args) {         // unsortedConsecutiveTwoMissing         int[] a6 = {1, 4};         System.out.println("Expected 2 and 3, Actual " + sortedConsecutiveTwoMissing(a6, 1));         // unsortedConsecutiveTwoMissing         int[] a7 = {-4, -1};         System.out.println("Expected -3 and -2, Actual " + sortedConsecutiveTwoMissing(a7, -4));         int[] a8 = {-4, -3, -2, -1};         System.out.println("Expected 0 and 1, Actual " + sortedConsecutiveTwoMissing(a8, -4));         int[] a9 = {5};         System.out.println("Expected 4 and 6, Actual " + sortedConsecutiveTwoMissing(a9, 4));         }      }
37032
I have a question about inheritance in Java.  I have two classes A and B , and class B, inherits from A:  public class A {      public A() {          System.out.println("Hi!");      } }   public class B extends A {      public B() {          System.out.println("Bye!");      }       public static void main(String[] args) {          B b = new B();      } }   When I run program B, the output is:  Hi! Bye!      Question : why the constructor of class A is invoked, when I create and object of class B ?    I know that B inherits everything from A - all instance or class variables, and all methods, and in this sense an object of B has all characteristics of A plus some other characteristics defined in B. However, I didn't know and didn't imagine that when I create an object of type B, the constructor of A is also invoked. So, writing this:  B b = new B();   creates Two objects - one of type B, and one of type A.  This is getting interesting,   can somebody explain why exactly this happens?
107235
#include&lt;iostream&gt; using namespace std;  class A  {    int a;    int b;    public:    void eat()    {       cout&lt;&lt;"A::eat()"&lt;&lt;endl;    } };  class B: public A {    public:    void eat()    {        cout&lt;&lt;"B::eat()"&lt;&lt;endl;     }  };  class C: public A {     public:    void eat()     {        cout&lt;&lt;"C::eat()"&lt;&lt;endl;     }  };  class D: public B, C {  };  int foo(A *ptr) {  ptr-&gt;eat();  } main() {  D obj; foo(&amp;(obj.B)); //error. How do i call with D's B part.  }   The above foo call is a compile time error.  I want to call foo with obj's B part without using virtual inheritance. How do i do that.   Also, in case of virtual inheritance, why the offset information need to be stored in the vtable. This can be determined at the compile time itself. In the above case, if we pass foo with D's object, at compile time only we can calculate the offset of D's A part.
77597
I got this question when I received a code review comment saying virtual functions need not be inline.   I thought inline virtual functions could come in handy in scenarios where functions are called on objects directly. But the counter-argument came to my mind is -- why would one want to define virtual and then use objects to call methods?  Is it best not to use inline virtual functions, since they're almost never expanded anyway?  Code snippet I used for analysis:  class Temp { public:      virtual ~Temp()     {     }     virtual void myVirtualFunction() const     {         cout&lt;&lt;"Temp::myVirtualFunction"&lt;&lt;endl;     }  };  class TempDerived : public Temp { public:      void myVirtualFunction() const     {         cout&lt;&lt;"TempDerived::myVirtualFunction"&lt;&lt;endl;     }  };  int main(void)  {     TempDerived aDerivedObj;     //Compiler thinks it's safe to expand the virtual functions     aDerivedObj.myVirtualFunction();      //type of object Temp points to is always known;     //does compiler still expand virtual functions?     //I doubt compiler would be this much intelligent!     Temp* pTemp = &amp;aDerivedObj;     pTemp-&gt;myVirtualFunction();      return 0; }
24641
We put all of our unit tests in their own projects.  We find that we have to make certain classes public instead of internal just for the unit tests.  Is there anyway to avoid having to do this.  What are the memory implication by making classes public instead of sealed?
30943
I think there must be something subtle going on here that I don't know about. Consider the following:  public class Foo&lt;T&gt; {   private T[] a = (T[]) new Object[5];    public Foo() {     // Add some elements to a   }    public T[] getA() {     return a;   } }   Suppose that your main method contains the following:  Foo&lt;Double&gt; f = new Foo&lt;Double&gt;(); Double[] d = f.getA();   You will get a CastClassException with the message java.lang.Object cannot be cast to java.lang.Double.  Can anyone tell me why? My understanding of ClassCastException is that it is thrown when you try to cast an object to a type that cannot be casted. That is, to a subclass of which it is not an instance (to quote the documentation). e.g.:  Object o = new Double(3.); Double d = (Double) o; // Working cast String s = (String) o; // ClassCastException   And it seems I can do this. If a was just a T instead of an array T[], we can get a and cast it without a problem. Why do arrays break this?  Thanks.
3278
So, I understand that the following doesn't work, but why doesn't it work?  interface Adapter&lt;E&gt; {}  class Adaptulator&lt;I&gt; {     &lt;E, A extends I &amp; Adapter&lt;E&gt;&gt; void add(Class&lt;E&gt; extl, Class&lt;A&gt; intl) {         addAdapterFactory(new AdapterFactory&lt;E, A&gt;(extl, intl));     } }   The add() method gives me a compile error, "Cannot specify any additional bound Adapter&lt;E&gt; when first bound is a type parameter" (in Eclipse), or "Type parameter cannot be followed by other bounds" (in IDEA), take your pick.  Clearly you're just Not Allowed to use the type parameter I there, before the &amp;, and that's that. (And before you ask, it doesn't work if you switch 'em, because there's no guarantee that I isn't a concrete class.) But why not? I've looked through Angelika Langer's FAQ and can't find an answer.  Generally when some generics limitation seems arbitrary, it's because you've created a situation where the type system can't actually enforce correctness. But I don't see what case would break what I'm trying to do here. I'd say maybe it has something to do with method dispatch after type erasure, but there's only one add() method, so it's not like there's any ambiguity...  Can someone demonstrate the problem for me?
94655
I was experimenting with C++ and found the below code as very strange.   class Foo{ public:     virtual void say_virtual_hi(){         std::cout &lt;&lt; "Virtual Hi";     }      void say_hi()     {         std::cout &lt;&lt; "Hi";     } };  int main(int argc, char** argv) {     Foo* foo = 0;     foo-&gt;say_hi(); // works well     foo-&gt;say_virtual_hi(); // will crash the app     return 0; }   I know that the virtual method call crashes because it requires a vtable lookup and can only work with valid objects.   I have the following questions    How does the non virtual method say_hi work on a NULL pointer? Where does the object foo get allocated?   Any thoughts?
52524
So I was making a class the other day and used Eclipse's method to create the equals method when I realized that it generated the following working code:  class Test {   private int privateInt;   [...]   public boolean equals(Object obj) {     [...]     Test t = (Test) obj;     if ( t.privateInt == privateInt ) {     [...]   } }   t.privateInt..???? It's suppose to be private! So I guess there is one more field visibility other than private, protected, package protected and public.  So what is happening here? How is this called? Where would somebody use this? Doesn't this break encapsulation? What if the class didn't have a mutator and I changed this? Does this happen to C++ as well? Is this an OO idiom? If not, then why did Java do it?  Generally, where can I find information about this?  Thank you.