class Greeter(name: String) {
fun greet() {
println("Hello, $name")
}
}
fun main(args: Array<String>) {
Greeter(args[0]).greet()
}
for above program I got this error
Unresolved reference: name
but when I add var or val
class Greeter(var name: String) {
or
class Greeter(val name: String) {
then program works fine, so why I need to add var or val to name, what is default type for constructor parameter val or var and why program gives me error when I not mention var or val
To use your value in the constructor like class Greeter(name: String), you can use init{}
class Greeter(name: String) {
var string:name = ""
init{
this.name = name
}
fun greet() {
println("Hello, $name")
}
}
or If you use val or var in the constructor it is more like class level variable and can be accessed anywhere inside the class
class Greeter(var name:String){
fun greet() {
println("Hello, $name")
}
}
The variable name can be used directly in the class then.
We can also give default values for the variables in both cases.
Adding val or var makes the parameter a property and can be accessed in the whole class.
Without this, it is only accessible inside init{}
The question is not making any sense, But the problem you are facing does make sense. In your case, the approach you are using is,
Wrong-Way:
// here name is just a dependency/value which will be used by the Greeter
// but since it is not assigned to any class members,
// it will not be accessible for member methods
class Greeter(name: String) {
fun greet(){} // can not access the 'name' value
}
Right-Way:
// here name is passed as a parameter but it is also made a class member
// with the same name, this class member will immutable as it is declared as 'val'
class Greeter(val name: String) {
fun greet(){} // can access the 'name' value
}
You can also replace val with var to make the name a mutable class member.
Related
I have multiple data classes and each class has a corresponding class containing more info. I want to write a function in which I should be able to pass an identifier (table name corresponding to the data class). Based on this identifier, object of the corresponding class should be made, the value changed and this object should be returned as output of the function. I have written a simplified version of it on playground but I am unable to get it to work. Any help is appreciated.
class someClass(
)
class objectForSomeClass(
var value: String
)
class someOtherClass(
)
class objectForSomeOtherClass(
var value: String
)
class doSomething() {
companion object {
val classMap = mapOf(
"someClass" to objectForSomeClass::class,
"someOtherClass" to objectForSomeOtherClass::class,
)
}
// Create a map of class name to a new object based on the class name input
fun dummyFun(className: String, valueInput: String): Map<String, kotlin.Any> {
var returnObject = mutableListOf<Pair<String, kotlin.Any>>()
when(className) {
"SOME_CLASS" -> {
returnObject = mutableListOf<Pair<String, justDoIt.classMap["someClass"]()>>()
}
"SOME_OTHER_CLASS" -> {
returnObject = Map<String, justDoIt.classMap["someOtherClass"]()>
}
}
returnObject[className].value = valueInput
return returnObject
}
}
fun main() {
var obj = doSomething()
var t = obj.dummyFun("SOME_CLASS", "Value to be inserted")
// do something with t
}
Not knowing more about your classes (the ones in your code are not data classes – a data class in Kotlin is a specific type of class) I still think a lot could be simplified down to maybe even this:
fun createObject(className: String, value: String): Any? {
return when (className) {
"SomeClass" -> ObjectForSomeClass(value)
"SomeOtherClass" -> ObjectForSomeOtherClass(value)
// ...
else -> null
}
}
Additionally:
The classMap is not necessary, you can hard-code the cases in the when clause as in my example. There is also no need for reflection, which you would need to create instances from SomeType::class.
With getting rid of classMap you also do not need the companion object holding it anymore, and then you are left with one function for creating instances of your classes, and this function does not have to be in a class. You might put it into a singleton class called object in Kotlin (https://kotlinlang.org/docs/object-declarations.html#object-expressions)
Data classes in Kotlin: https://kotlinlang.org/docs/data-classes.html
You could maybe also replace each class someClass & class objectForSomeClass pair with a class someClass with a companion object.
In Kotlin if I define a method on an anonymous object, sometimes I am able to access it, while other times I am not. This seems to have something to do with scoping rules, but I am not sure what.
In the code example below, the access to example3.field.method() will cause a compilation error. Interestingly, example2.field.method() compiles just fine.
What could be the explanation for the below behaviour?
class Example3 {
val field = object {
fun method() {}
}
}
fun showcase() {
val example1 = object {
fun method() {}
}
example1.method()
println(example1::class.qualifiedName)
class Example2 {
val field = object {
fun method() {}
}
}
val example2 = Example2()
example2.field.method()
println(example2::class.qualifiedName)
val example3 = Example3()
// example3.field.method() // won't compile
println(example3::class.qualifiedName)
}
From docs Object Expressions and Declarations:
Note that anonymous objects can be used as types only in local and
private declarations. If you use an anonymous object as a return type
of a public function or the type of a public property, the actual type
of that function or property will be the declared supertype of the
anonymous object, or Any if you didn't declare any supertype. Members
added in the anonymous object will not be accessible.
Demonstrated in code sample below:
class Example4{
val publicObj = object{
val x = 1
}
private val privateObj = object{
val x = 2
}
fun showcase(){
val scopedObj = object{
val x = 3
}
println(publicObj.x) // ERROR : unresolved reference: x
println(privateObj.x) // OK
println(scopedObj.x) // OK
}
}
Pawel gave the correct answer to your question, pointing to the documentation:
the actual type of that function or property will be the declared supertype of the anonymous object, or Any if you didn't declare any supertype.
But just adding that if you really need to access example3.field.method() you could declare a supertype to field in Example3:
interface MyInterface {
fun method()
}
class Example3 {
val field = object: MyInterface {
override fun method() {}
}
}
fun main() {
val example3 = Example3()
example3.field.method()
}
I'm new to Kotlin, so I have this interface.
interface User {
var nickName : String
}
Now I want to create a class PrivateUser that implements this interface. I have also to implement the abstract member nickName.
Via constructor it's very simple
class PrivateUser(override var nickName: String) : User
However when I try to implement member inside the class Idea generates me this code
class Button: User {
override var nickName: String
get() = TODO("not implemented")
set(value) {}
}
It's confusing to me how to implement it further.
Properties must be initialized in Kotlin. When you declare the property in the constructor, it gets initialized with whatever you pass in. If you declare it in the body, you need to define it yourself, either with a default value, or parsed from other properties.
Some examples:
class Button : User {
override var nickname = "Fred"
}
class Button(val firstName: String, val lastName: String) : User {
override var nickname = "${firstname[0]}$lastname"
}
The code generated by IDEA is useful if you want a non-default getter and/or setter, or if you want a property without a backing field (it's getter and setter calculate on the fly when accessed).
More examples:
class Button : User {
override var nickname = "Fred"
get() = if (field.isEmpty()) "N/A" else field
set(value) {
// No Tommy
field = if (value == "Tommy") "" else value
}
}
class Button(val number: Int) : User {
var id = "$number"
private set
override var nickname: String
get() {
val parts = id.split('-')
return if (parts.size > 1) parts[0] else ""
}
set(value) {
field = if (value.isEmpty()) "$number" else "$value-$number"
}
}
I want to be able to save a class instance to a public static variable but I can't figure out how to do this in Kotlin.
class Foo {
public static Foo instance;
public Foo() {
instance = this;
}
}
Update: since this answer is getting a decent amount of upvotes, I really wanted to say that you shouldn't do the below, but instead just use object Foo { ... }, like Roman rightly points out in the comment.
Previous answer:
The closest thing to Java's static fields is a companion object. You can find the documentation reference for them here: https://kotlinlang.org/docs/reference/object-declarations.html#companion-objects
Your code in Kotlin would look something like this:
class Foo {
companion object {
lateinit var instance: Foo
}
init {
instance = this
}
}
If you want your fields/methods to be exposed as static to Java callers, you can apply the #JvmStatic annotation:
class Foo {
companion object {
#JvmStatic lateinit var instance: Foo
}
init {
instance = this
}
}
It looks that you want to define a singleton object. It is supported in Kotlin as a first-class concept:
object Foo {
...
}
All the boilerplate code with static field and constructor is taken care by the Kotlin automatically. You don't have to write any of that.
From the Kotlin code you can refer to the instance of this object simply as Foo. From the Java code you can referer to the instance of this object as Foo.INSTANCE, because the Kotlin compiler automatically creates the corresponding static field named INSTANCE.
first you create a simple class then after create a block followed by companion object keyword
for example:
class Test{
companion object{
fun getValue(): String{
return "Test String"
}
}
}
you can call this class function using class name dot function name
for example:
// here you will get the function value
Test.getValue()
You can create a companion object for the class, and if you want the field to be static you can use the annotation #JvmStatic. Companion object have access to private members of the class it is companion for.
See below an example:
class User {
private lateinit var name: String
override fun toString() = name
companion object {
#JvmStatic
val instance by lazy {
User().apply { name = "jtonic" }
}
}
}
class CompanionTest {
#Test
fun `test companion object`() {
User.instance.toString() shouldBe "jtonic"
}
}
With the code below, I am getting the following error in IntelliJ IDEA 13.1.6 and Kotlin plugin 0.11.91.AndroidStudio.3:
Platform declaration clash: The following declarations have the same JVM signature (getName()Ljava/lang/String;):
• public open fun getName(): kotlin.String?
• internal final fun <get-name>(): kotlin.String?
Java class, JavaInterface.java:
public interface JavaInterface {
public String getName();
}
Kotlin class, KotlinClass.kt
public class KotlinClass(val name: String?) : JavaInterface
I've tried overriding the 'getter' method by
adding override fun getName(): String? = name, but that produces the same error.
I can see one workaround by doing this instead:
public class KotlinClass(val namePrivate: String?) : JavaInterface {
override fun getName(): String? = namePrivate
}
But in my real-world case I have a number of properties to implement and need setters too. Doing this for each property doesn't seem very Kotlin-ish. What am I missing?
Making that variable private solves the problem.
public class KotlinClass(private val name: String?) : JavaInterface
You could use #JvmField for instructs the compiler not generate getter/setter, and you can implement your setters and getters. With this your code work well in Java (as attribute getter/setter) and Kotlin as property
Example:
JAVA:
public interface Identifiable<ID extends Serializable>
{
ID getId();
}
KOTLIN:
class IdentifiableImpl(#JvmField var id: String) :Identifiable<String>
{
override fun getId(): String
{
TODO("not implemented")
}
}
The annotation feature of Kotlin named #JvmName will solve the duplication problem in Java and Kotlin when having the same signature.
fun function(p: String) {
// ...
}
// Signature: function(Ljava/lang/String)
With the use of JvmName will be:
#JvmName("functionOfKotlin")
fun function(p: String) {
// ...
}
// Signature: functionOfKotlin(Ljava/lang/String)
IMHO most readable combination is field + explicit interface implementation by the single-expression function (combination of #Renato Garcia's and #Steven Spungin's answers):
Java:
public inteface SomeInterface {
String getFoo();
}
Kotlin:
class Implementation(#JvmField val foo: String) : SomeInterface {
override fun getFoo() = foo
}
Another work-around is to declare the properties in an abstract Kotlin class, then write a small java class that extends KotlinClass and implements JavaInterface.
// JavaInterface.java
public interface JavaInterface {
int getFoo();
void setFoo(int value);
}
// KotlinClass.kt
abstract class KotlinClass(open var foo : Int = 0) {
}
// JavaAdapter.java
class JavaAdapter extends KotlinClass implements JavaInterface {
// all code in KotlinClass, but can't implement JavaInterface there
// because kotlin properties cannot override java methods.
}
We have found that to use the same names without clashing, the ctor args must be private AND you must still override the interfaces methods. You don't need any additional backing fields. Also, your expression body assignment will not recurse, so you can safely use that syntax.
Java Interface
interface IUser {
String getUserScope();
String getUserId();
}
Kotlin Class
class SampleUser(private val userScope: String, private val userId: String) : IUser {
override fun getUserId() = userId
override fun getUserScope() = userScope
}
If you have direct control over the interface then the best approach is to write the interface in Kotlin. You can then write your class
public class KotlinClass(override val name: String?) : KotlinInterface
and still reference it from any Java code using the same interface as before. This looks a lot neater than setting all the properties to private and overriding the get function. Obviously if you can't migrate the interface to Java because you don't own it then that seems to be the only solution.
public interface JavaInterface {
public String getName();
}
public class KotlinClass(val namePrivate: String?) : JavaInterface {
private var name = namePrivate
override fun getName(): String? {
return name
}
}
Rename the variable to something else, or make it private if u dont want it to be public.
convert function to property instead of initializing property from a function.
for ex:
fun getCountriesList(): List<Country> {
val countries = mutableListOf<Country>()
countries.add(Country("in", "+91", "India", R.drawable.indian_flag))
countries.add(Country("us", "+1", "United States",R.drawable.us_flag))
return countries
}
to
val countriesList: List<Country>
get() {
val countries = mutableListOf<Country>()
countries.add(Country("in", "+91", "India", R.drawable.indian_flag))
countries.add(Country("us", "+1", "United States", R.drawable.us_flag))
return countries
}