Re: Clashing Interface methods
rossum wrote:
Is there a way to deal with interfaces which have clashing method
definitions?
I am trying to write my own queue, based on a Hashtable:
public class HashQueue<E>
extends Hashtable<Integer, E>
implements Queue<E> { ... }
I would avoid the direct extends/implements combination. Direct access
by your callers to the Hashtable would make it impossible for you to
ensure conformance to the Queue contract.
Instead, have a field:
Map<Integer, E> data = new Hashtable<Integer, E>();
and write the Queue methods using the "data" field to store the data.
You could extend AbstractQueue and only implement the methods it
requires, or implement Queue directly.
With this approach, there is no confusion between this.remove and
data.remove.
In the unlikely event that your callers really do need to access the
Map, you could provide a method getMap, but implement it something like
this:
public Map<Integer, E> getMap(){
return Collections.unmodifiableMap(data);
}
which does not let the caller change your data Map.
Patricia