In-depth abstract class and interface (2)

For other specific door types, extends can use the door defined in abstract class or implements to use the door defined in interface mode. It seems that there is no big difference between abstract class and interface.

If you want the door to have the alarm function. How can we design the class structure for this example (in this example, we mainly want to demonstrate the differences between abstract class and interface in the design concept, other irrelevant issues are simplified or ignored.) The following describes possible solutions and analyzes these solutions at the design concept layer.

Solution 1:

Add an alarm method to the door definition as follows:

Abstract class door {abstract void open (); abstract void close (); abstract void alarm () ;}or interface door {void open (); void close (); void alarm ();}

The alarmdoor with alarm function is defined as follows:

Class alarmdoor extends door {void open (){... } Void close (){... } Void alarm (){... } Or class alarmdoor implements door {void open (){... } Void close (){... } Void alarm (){... }}

This method violates a core principle in object-oriented design, ISP (interface segregation priciple ), in the definition of door, the inherent behavior methods of the door concept are mixed with the behavior methods of another concept "alarm. One problem is that the modules that rely solely on the door concept will change due to changes in the concept of "alarm" (for example, modifying the parameters of the alarm method.

Solution 2:

Since open, close, and alarm belong to two different concepts, they should be defined in abstract classes that represent these two concepts according to the ISP principle. The two concepts are defined by abstract class. Both concepts are defined by interface. One is defined by abstract class, and the other is defined by interface.

Obviously, because the Java language does not support multiple inheritance, both concepts are defined using abstract class. The latter two methods are feasible, but their selection reflects the understanding of the concept nature in the problem field, and whether the reflection of the design intent is correct and reasonable. Let's analyze and explain them one by one.

If both concepts are defined using the interface method, two problems are identified:

1. We may not understand the problem. Is alarmdoor actually a door or an alarm?

2. If we have no problem in understanding the problem field, for example, we have found that alarmdoor is essentially consistent with door through analysis of the problem field, therefore, our design intent cannot be correctly revealed during implementation, because the definitions of these two concepts (both using the interface method definition) do not reflect the above meaning.

If our understanding of the problem field is: alarmdoor is essentially a door in concept, it also has the alarm function. How can we design and implement it to clearly reflect what we mean? As mentioned above, abstract class represents an inheritance relation in Java, and the inheritance relation is essentially a "is a" relation. So we should use the Abstarct class method to define the concept of door. In addition, alarmdoor has the alarm function, indicating that it can complete the behaviors defined in the alarm concept. Therefore, the alarm concept can be defined through interface. As follows:

abstract class Door { abstract void open(); abstract void close()； } interface Alarm { void alarm(); } class AlarmDoor extends Door implements Alarm { void open() { … } void close() { … } void alarm() { … } }

This implementation method can clearly reflect our understanding of the problem field and correctly reveal our design intent. Abstract class represents the "is a" relation, and interface represents the "like a" relation. You can use it as a basis for your selection, of course, this is based on the understanding of the problem field. For example, if we think that alarmdoor is essentially an alarm and has the door function, then the above definition method will be reversed.

Abstract class and interface are two methods of defining abstract classes in Java. They have great similarity. However, their choices often reflect the understanding of the concept nature in the problem field, and whether the reflection of the design intent is correct and reasonable, because they represent different relationships between concepts (although they all implement the required functions ). This is actually a common use of language. I hope readers can understand it in detail. (T117)Author's blog:Http://blog.csdn.net/zaowei21/