Referring here
A is a precompiled Java class (I also have the source file)
B is a Java class that I am authoring
B extends A.
How can logic be implemen
I would be rather hesitant to do this. Please correct me if I am wrong and then I will delete, but it sounds like you want to maintain an A object along with a B object. If they indeed are not the same object, the "tying together" (that's a scientific term) you'll have to do would be pretty ugly.
Class A
should define the methods it's going to call (probably as abstract ones, and A should be an abstract class, per Paul Haahr's excellent guide); B
can (in fact to be concrete MUST, if the method are abstract) override those methods. Now, calls to those methods from other methods in A
, when happening in an instance of class B, go to B's overrides.
The overall design pattern is known as Template Method; the methods to be overridden are often called "hook methods", and the method performing the calls, the "organizing method".
Yes it seems that if you override the super/base-classes's functions, calls to those functions in the base class will go to the child/derived class. Seems like a bad design in my opinion, but there you go.
class Base
{
public void foo()
{
doStuff();
}
public void doStuff()
{
print("base");
}
}
class Derived extends Base
{
@Override
public void doStuff()
{
print("derived");
}
}
new Derived().foo(); // Prints "derived".
Obviously all of Derived
's methods have to be already defined in Base
, but to do it otherwise (without introspection) would be logically impossible.