Create instance for a class interface in a single line? - oop

Maybe it's a pretty basic question but I didn't manage to find out if it's possible or not.
Since 7.40, we have the NEW operator to create instances. It allows to create an object and call a method in a single line:
DATA(result) = NEW zclass( )->method( ).
But if my zclass implements a zinterface, I would like to do the following in a single line:
DATA: zif_instance TYPE REF TO zinterface.
zif_instance = NEW zclass( ).
DATA(result) = zif_instance->method( ).
Is it possible?

There can be three answers.
Either you use the interface component selector ~:
DATA(result) = NEW zclass( )->zif_instance~method( ).
Or your class defines an alias to the interface method, say method_alias, via the ALIASES statement, i.e. ALIASES method_alias FOR zif_instance~method (NB: the alias could also be the same name as the original method name i.e. method):
DATA(result) = NEW zclass( )->method_alias( ).
Or you have the CAST operator.
DATA(result) = CAST zif_instance( NEW zclass( ) )->method( ).

Related

How to expose the return type of a global class method?

I've written an ABAP Method, which returns me some analyses in a custom table.
Now I want to call this Method from an RFC module.
So far so good - the method works fine, but I'm curious of how to return this table?
Do I have to create a table / structure ... in SE11 to make it work because otherwise I can't refer to this table type or is there an easier way?
I'm quite new to ABAP so I don't know the best practices.
m_analyses = new zcl_manalyses( ).
data(lt_m_analyses) = m_analyses->analyse_m_data(
budat_from = budat_from
budat_to = budat_to
).
The TYPES statement can not only occur inside a method's body, but also inside the class definition, in which case it can be accessed from other places with class_name=>type_name (if it's public):
CLASS cl_user_registry DEFINITION PUBLIC.
PUBLIC SECTION.
TYPES:
BEGIN OF user,
firstname TYPE string,
lastname TYPE string,
END OF user,
users TYPE STANDARD TABLE OF user.
METHODS:
get_current_users
RETURNING users.
ENDCLASS.
DATA current_users TYPE cl_user_registry=>users.
current_users = cl_user_registry=>get_current_users( ).
You first have to create a structure in ABAP Dictionary (SE11), then you create a table type in SE11 as well.
You then reference the structure in the line type of the table type.
Try using the new global table type, it should work. (with typing 'TYPE')

Resolving the method of a ABAP dynamic call: order of types considered

I try to provoke a behaviour described in the ABAP Keyword Documentation 7.50 but fail. It's given with Alternative 2 of CALL METHOD - dynamic_meth:
CALL METHOD oref->(meth_name) ...
Effect
... oref can be any class reference variable ... that points to an object that contains the method ... specified in meth_name. This method is searched for first in the static type, then in the dynamic type of oref
I use the test code as given below. The static type of oref is CL1, the dynamic type CL2. Shouldn't then the dynamic CALL METHOD statement call the method M in CL1?
REPORT ZU_DEV_2658_DYNAMIC.
CLASS CL1 DEFINITION.
PUBLIC SECTION.
METHODS M.
ENDCLASS.
CLASS CL1 IMPLEMENTATION.
METHOD M.
write / 'original'.
ENDMETHOD.
ENDCLASS.
CLASS CL2 DEFINITION INHERITING FROM CL1.
PUBLIC SECTION.
METHODS M REDEFINITION.
ENDCLASS.
CLASS CL2 IMPLEMENTATION.
METHOD M.
write / 'redefinition'.
ENDMETHOD.
ENDCLASS.
START-OF-SELECTION.
DATA oref TYPE REF TO cl1. " static type is CL1
CREATE OBJECT oref TYPE cl2. " dynamic type is CL2
oref->m( ). " writes 'redefinition' - that's ok
CALL METHOD oref->('M'). " writes 'redefinition' - shouldn't that be 'original'?
Update:
I'd like to answer to the (first four) comments to my original question. Because of the lengthy code snippet, I answer by augmenting my post, not by comment.
It is true that the behaviour of the code snippet of the original question is standard OO behaviour. It's also true that for calls with static method name and class, types are resolved as given by the link. But then:
Why does the ABAP Keyword Documentation make the statement I've linked?
Calls with dynamic method names do search for the method name in the dynamic type, as demonstrated by the following code piece. That's certainly not standard OO behaviour.
My question was: Apparently, the search mechanism differs from the one described. Is the description wrong or else do I miss something?
REPORT ZU_DEV_2658_DYNAMIC4.
CLASS CL_A DEFINITION.
ENDCLASS.
CLASS CL_B DEFINITION INHERITING FROM CL_A.
PUBLIC SECTION.
METHODS M2 IMPORTING VALUE(caller) TYPE c OPTIONAL PREFERRED PARAMETER caller.
ENDCLASS.
CLASS CL_B IMPLEMENTATION.
METHOD M2.
write / caller && ' calls b m2'.
ENDMETHOD.
ENDCLASS.
START-OF-SELECTION.
DATA orefaa TYPE REF TO cl_a.
CREATE OBJECT orefaa TYPE cl_a. " static and dynamic type is CL_A
*orefaa->m2( 'orefa->m2( )' ). syntax error: method m2 is unknown'.
*CALL METHOD orefaa->('M2') EXPORTING caller = 'CALL METHOD orefa->("M2")'. results in exception: method m2 is unknown'.
DATA orefab TYPE REF TO cl_a. " static type is CL_A
CREATE OBJECT orefab TYPE cl_b. " dynamic type is CL_B
*orefab->m2( 'orefab->m2( )' ). results in syntax error: method m2 is unknown'.
CALL METHOD orefab->('M2') EXPORTING caller = 'CALL METHOD orefab->("M2")'. " succeeds
You are actually answering your own question there, aren't you?
In your first example, you perform a call method to the method m on a variable that's typed as cl1. The runtime looks up the class cl1, and finds the requested method m there. It then calls that method. However, your variable actually has the type cl2, a sub-class of cl1, that overrides that method m. So the call effectively reaches that redefinition of the method, not the super-class's original implementation. As you and the commenters sum it up: this is standard object-oriented behavior.
Note how in essence this has nothing to do at all with the static-vs-dynamic statement you quote from the documentation. The method m is statically present in cl1, so there is no dynamic lookup involved whatsoever. I assume you were looking for a way to probe the meaning of this statement, but this example doesn't address it.
However, your second example then precisely hits the nail on the head. Let me rewrite it again with different names to talk it through. Given an empty super class super_class:
CLASS super_class DEFINITION.
ENDCLASS.
and a sub-class sub_class that inherits it:
CLASS sub_class DEFINITION
INHERITING FROM super_class.
PUBLIC SECTION.
METHODS own_method.
ENDCLASS.
Now, as super_class is empty, sub_class does not take over any methods there. In contrast, we add a method own_method specifically to this class.
The following statement sequence then demonstrates exactly what's special with the dynamic calling:
DATA cut TYPE REF TO super_class.
cut = NEW sub_class( ).
CALL METHOD cut->('OWN_METHOD').
" runs sub_class->own_method
The runtime encounters the call method statement. It first inspects the static type of the variable cut, which is super_class. The requested method own_method is not present there. If this was all that happened, the call would now fail with a method-not-found exception. If we wrote a hard-coded cut->own_method( ), we wouldn't even get this far - the compiler would already reject this.
However, with call method the runtime continues. It determines the dynamic type of cut as being sub_class. Then it looks whether it finds an own_method there. And indeed, it does. The statement is accepted and the call is directed to own_method. This additional effort that's happening here is exactly what's described in the documentation as "This method is searched for first in the static type, then in the dynamic type of oref".
What we're seeing here is different from hard-coded method calls, but it is also not "illegal". In essence, the runtime here first casts the variable cut to its dynamic type sub_class, then looks up the available methods again. As if we were writing DATA(casted) = CAST super_class( cut ). casted->own_method( ). I cannot say why the runtime acts this way. It feels like the kind of relaxed behavior we usually find in ABAP when statements evolve throughout their lifetime and need to remain backwards-compatible.
There is one detail that needs additional addressing: the tiny word "then" in the documentation. Why is it important to say that it first looks in the static type, then in the dynamic type? In the example above, it could simply say "and/or" instead.
Why this detail may be important is described in my second answer to your question, which I posted some days ago. Let me wrap it up shortly again here, so this answer here is complete. Given an interface with a method some_method:
INTERFACE some_interface PUBLIC.
METHODS some_method RETURNING VALUE(result) TYPE string.
ENDINTERFACE.
and a class that implements it, but also adds another method of its own, with the exact same name some_method:
CLASS some_class DEFINITION PUBLIC.
PUBLIC SECTION.
INTERFACES some_interface.
METHODS some_method RETURNING VALUE(result) TYPE string.
ENDCLASS.
CLASS some_class IMPLEMENTATION.
METHOD some_interface~some_method.
result = `Executed the interface's method`.
ENDMETHOD.
METHOD some_method.
result = `Executed the class's method`.
ENDMETHOD.
ENDCLASS.
Which one of the two methods is now called by CALL METHOD cut->('some_method')? The order in the documentation describes it:
DATA cut TYPE REF TO some_interface.
cut = NEW some_class( ).
DATA result TYPE string.
CALL METHOD cut->('SOME_METHOD')
RECEIVING
result = result.
cl_abap_unit_assert=>assert_equals(
act = result
exp = `Executed the interface's method` ).
Upon encountering the call method statement, the runtime checks the static type of the variable cut first, which is some_interface. This type has a method some_method. The runtime thus will continue to call this method. This, again is standard object orientation. Especially note how this example calls the method some_method by giving the string some_method alone, although its fully qualified name is actually some_interface~some_method. This is consistent with the hard-coded variant cut->some_method( ).
If the runtime acted the other way around, inspecting the dynamic type first, and the static type afterwards, it would act differently and call the class's own method some_method instead.
There is no way to call the class's own some_method, by the way. Although the documentation suggests that the runtime would consider cut's dynamic type some_class in a second step, it also adds that "In the dynamic case too, only interface components can be accessed and it is not possible to use interface reference variable to access any type of component."
The only way to call the class's own method some_method, is by changing cut's type:
DATA cut TYPE REF TO some_class.
cut = NEW some_class( ).
DATA result TYPE string.
CALL METHOD cut->('SOME_METHOD')
RECEIVING
result = result.
cl_abap_unit_assert=>assert_equals(
act = result
exp = `Executed the class's method` ).
This is rather about interface implementations than class inheritance. What the ABAP language help means is this:
Suppose you have an interface that declares a method
INTERFACE some_interface PUBLIC.
METHODS some_method RETURNING VALUE(result) TYPE string.
ENDINTERFACE.
and a class that implements it, but alongside also declares a method with the same name, of its own
CLASS some_class DEFINITION PUBLIC.
PUBLIC SECTION.
INTERFACES some_interface.
METHODS some_method RETURNING VALUE(result) TYPE string.
ENDCLASS.
CLASS some_class IMPLEMENTATION.
METHOD some_interface~some_method.
result = `Executed the interface's method`.
ENDMETHOD.
METHOD some_method.
result = `Executed the class's method`.
ENDMETHOD.
ENDCLASS.
then a dynamic call on a reference variable typed with the interface will choose the interface method over the class's own method
METHOD prefers_interface_method.
DATA cut TYPE REF TO zfh_some_interface.
cut = NEW zfh_some_class( ).
DATA result TYPE string.
CALL METHOD cut->('SOME_METHOD')
RECEIVING
result = result.
cl_abap_unit_assert=>assert_equals(
act = result
exp = `Executed the interface's method` ).
ENDMETHOD.
This is actually the exact same behavior we are observing with regular calls to methods, i.e. if we provide the method's name in the code, not in a variable.
Only if the runtime cannot find a method with the given name in the static type will it start looking for a method with that name in the dynamic type. This is different from regular method calls, where the compiler will reject the missing some_interface~ and require us to add an alias for this to work.
By the way, as some people brought it up in the comments, the "static" here does not refer to CLASS-METHODS, as opposed to "instance" methods. "Static type" and "dynamic type" refer to different things, see the section Static Type and Dynmic Type in the help article Assignment Rules for Reference Variables.

How can I define a filled structure/table as class constant in ABAP Objects

I want to have an immutable predefined table as class variable. How do I define such a variable?
This is an old question, with a simple answer:
Just create a static method (getter) that returns constant data.
Instead of using:
data(ls_sample) = lcl_myclass=>cs_data.
Use:
data(ls_sample) = lcl_myclass=>cs_data( ).
I would create an attribute and mark it as "Read Only", You can set it via Constructor or with Set-Method.
You cannot do like this using class constants in ABAP. The documentation explicitly says that:
You can specify a start value val for the ABAP types string and
xstring only.
Constant internal tables, reference variables, and structures with not
purely character-like flat components can be assigned their initial
value by IS INITIAL only, and are therefore always initial.
As Tapio suggested, your only choice is read-only attributes, and I also suggest you to use static attributes, which can be initialized in constructor.
For example
CLASS lcl_test DEFINITION.
PUBLIC SECTION.
CLASS-DATA: itab TYPE RANGE OF i READ-ONLY.
METHODS:
constructor.
ENDCLASS.
CLASS lcl_test IMPLEMENTATION.
METHOD constructor.
itab = VALUE #( sign = 'I' option = 'BT' ( low = 1 high = 10 )
( low = 21 high = 30 )
( low = 41 high = 50 )
option = 'GE' ( low = 61 ) ).
ENDMETHOD.
ENDCLASS.
One thing that after all that time would be a workaroud is the following:
Create your list
serialize it and save it as a read-only string
create a getter that deserializes it

Jackson constructParametricType is deprecated, but constructParameterizedType doesn't work the same

Here is my code snippet, and the newer "constructParameterizedType" doesn't match my needs (unless I am missing something, which I assume I am). I have a genericized class called Result where T is any basic class that extends my "Inflatable" base class. represents the data records coming back from Salesforce REST API... so here is example of code that is working:
Class c = Class.forName("sfshare.UserRecord" );
JavaType type = mapper.getTypeFactory().constructParametricType(Result.class, c);
Result<T> res = mapper.readValue(rspData, type);
But if I use the newer (non-deprecated) "constructParameterizedType()" method, this same code will not compile because it isn't matching the parameters of constructParameterizedType. But constructParameterizedType isn't in use much yet and there are no examples to use... only the Javadoc - which doesn't make sense for my use-case.
If you look at arguments and specifically Javadocs, you will note that there is a new type: 2nd argument is the intended 'target' for parameters.
To give an example of meaning is that if you want to construct equivalent of:
ArrayList<String>
what you want to pass as arguments are:
constructParameterizedType(ArrayList.class, List.class, String.class)
or, possibly, Collection.class for second argument.
Think of it as the underlying relevant type you are trying to provide parameters for.
The underlying reason for this change is somewhat complicated and has to do with handling of "add-on" interfaces like Iterable<T>: for those cases it is necessary to provide different classes.
But in most end-user use cases you will just need to pass the same class as first and second argument.
Try this:
Class c = Class.forName("sfshare.UserRecord");
TypeFactory typeFactory = mapper.getTypeFactory();
JavaType type = typeFactory.constructParametrizedType(Result.class, Result.class, c);
Result<T> res = mapper.readValue(rspData, type);
or if your Result<T> class implements an interface:
JavaType type = typeFactory.constructParametrizedType(Result.class, ResultInterface.class, c);

Hibernate SQL transformation fails for Enum field type

I am using a SQL query and then transforming the result using Hibernates's Transformers.aliasToBean().
One of the columns in my query is an enum. The transformation somehow fails for the enum. What should I do? Which datatype should I use? I want more than 1 character to transform the result into my enum type.
This is how the simplified version of my query/code looks like (b is an enum in the table profiles):
session.createSQLQuery("select a, b from profiles").setResultTransformer(Transformers.aliasToBean(Profile.class))
.list();
Exception : expected type: Foo.ProfileStateEnum, actual value: java.lang.Character
Assuming that the java enum type that corresponds to column b is Foo.ProfileStateEnum, the following code snippet should work for you. (I tested with Hibernate 4.1.6)
import java.util.Properties;
import org.hibernate.type.Type;
import org.hibernate.type.IntegerType;
import org.hibernate.internal.TypeLocatorImpl.TypeLocatorImpl;
import org.hibernate.type.TypeResolver.TypeResolver;
import org.hibernate.type.EnumType;
Properties params = new Properties();
params.put("enumClass", "Foo.ProfileStateEnum");
params.put("type", "12"); /*type 12 instructs to use the String representation of enum value*/
/*If you are using Hibernate 5.x then try:
params.put("useNamed", true);*/
Type myEnumType = new TypeLocatorImpl(new TypeResolver()).custom(EnumType.class, params);
List<Profile> profileList= getSession().createSQLQuery("select a as ID, b from profiles")
.addScalar("ID", IntegerType.INSTANCE)
.addScalar("b", myEnumType )
.setResultTransformer(Transformers.aliasToBean(Profile.class))
.list();
I found two ways to achieve it.
Use org.hibernate.type.CustomType with org.hibernate.type.EnumType(put either EnumType.NAMED or EnumType.TYPE, see EnumType#interpretParameters). Like below:
Properties parameters = new Properties();
parameters.put(EnumType.ENUM, MyEnum.class.getName());
// boolean or string type of true/false; declare database type
parameters.put(EnumType.NAMED, true);
// string only; declare database type
parameters.put(EnumType.TYPE, String.valueOf(Types.VARCHAR));
EnumType<MyEnum> enumType = new EnumType<>();
enumType.setTypeConfiguration(new TypeConfiguration());
enumType.setParameterValues(parameters);
CustomType customEnumType = new CustomType(enumType);
Another simple way. Use org.hibernate.type.StandardBasicTypeTemplate with org.hibernate.type.descriptor.sql.*TypeDescriptor. Like below:
StandardBasicTypeTemplate<MyEnum> enumType =
new StandardBasicTypeTemplate<>(VarcharTypeDescriptor.INSTANCE,
new EnumJavaTypeDescriptor<>(MyEnum.class));
Let's see why you are getting this exception.
From the question it is obvious that you have used #Enumerated(EnumType.STRING) annotation for the field 'b' in you model class. So the field is an enum for your model class and a varchar for your database. Native SQL is not concerned about you model class and returns what ever is there in the database table as it is. So in your case, the SQLQuery you are using will return a String for 'b' instead of a ProfileStateEnum type. But your setter method for 'b' in the Profile class takes a ProfileStateEnum type argument.
Thus you get the exception "expected type: Foo.ProfileStateEnum, actual value: java.lang.Character"
You can use Aliasing to solve the problem.
What I suggest is, alias your column with any name you want and create a setter method for that alias in your model/dto.
For example, lets alias your column as 'enumStr'.
Then your query will look like this : "select a, b as enumStr from profiles"
Now, create a setter method for that alias in the your Profile class.
(Assuming that the enum ProfileStateEnum can have any of the two values STATE1 and STATE2)
public void setEnumStr(String str){
/*Convert the string to enum and set the field 'b'*/
if(str.equals(ProfileStateEnum.STATE1.toString())){
b = ProfileStateEnum.STATE1;
} else {
b = ProfileStateEnum.STATE2;
}
}
Now on transforming, the setter for the alias setEnumStr(String) will be invoked instead of setter for the field setB(ProfileStateEnum) and the string will be converted and saved to the type you want without any exceptions.
I am a beginner in Hibernate and the solution worked for me. I am using PostgreSQL. But I believe it works for other databases too.