Second attempt at this question (the initial code wasn\'t enough to highlight the issue)
Here is the code that does not compile:
interface Player<
Mixing generics and raw types isn't going to work. If you need these interfaces to reference each other, they also need to reference themselves:
interface Player<R, P extends Player<R, P, G>, G extends Game<R, G, P>>
{
R takeTurn(G game);
}
interface Game<R, G extends Game<R, G, P>, P extends Player<R, P, G>>
{
void play(P player);
}
Although this is looking rather hairbrained, and I'm not sure why you need it.
Edit:
I was able to implement your AbstractGame
based on the above:
abstract class AbstractGame<R, P extends Player<R, P, AbstractGame<R, P>>>
implements Game<R, AbstractGame<R, P>, P>
{
public final void play(final P player)
{
final R value;
value = player.takeTurn(this);
turnTaken(value);
}
protected abstract void turnTaken(R value);
}
However I couldn't quite close the circuit with XGame
and XPlayer
:
public class XGame
extends AbstractGame<Integer, XPlayer> //compile error on XPlayer
{
protected void turnTaken(Integer value) { }
}
public class XPlayer
implements Player<Integer, XPlayer, XGame> //compile error on XGame
{
@Override
public Integer takeTurn(final XGame game)
{
return (42);
}
}
The issue seems to be that each of the generic declarations of XGame
and XPlayer
needs the other to be correct. This is where your design is truly cyclical. If the compiler 'assumed' each was correct, it would in theory work. But it doesn't.
Edit 2:
How about this:
interface Game<R, G extends Game<R, G>>
{
void play(Player<R, G> player);
}
interface Player<R, G extends Game<R, G>>
{
R takeTurn(G game);
}
abstract class AbstractGame<R, G extends AbstractGame<R, G>>
implements Game<R, G>
{
public final void play(final Player<R, G> player)
{
final R value;
value = player.takeTurn(self());
turnTaken(value);
}
protected abstract G self();
protected abstract void turnTaken(R value);
}
public final class XGame extends AbstractGame<Integer, XGame>
{
protected XGame self() {
return this;
}
protected void turnTaken(Integer value) { }
}
public class XPlayer implements Player<Integer, XGame>
{
@Override
public Integer takeTurn(final XGame game)
{
return (42);
}
}
The key here was declaring an abstract method self()
in AbstractGame
that returns an instance of type G
. Extending classes must resolve the inherited type parameter with their own type, and implement self()
to return this
. This is only suitable for internal code, since an extending class could easily lie, for example:
public class EvilGame extends AbstractGame<Integer, AnotherGame> { ... }
See my answer here and this post for more details on this pattern.
As Paul Bellora points out, you're mixing generic and raw types -- and the correct, fully-generic solution is a bit of a mess and requires a lot of redundancy. There's no nice way (that I know of) to do circular (but not recursive) generics in Java.
Rather than struggling with this, I would make both Player
and Game
generic on just one parameter, the type of value being played with -- what you had as R
.
interface Game<R> {
void play(Player<? extends R> player);
}
interface Player<R> {
R takeTurn(Game<? super R> game);
}
abstract class AbstractGame<R> implements Game<R> {
public final void play(Player<? extends R> player) {
final R value;
value = player.takeTurn(this);
turnTaken(value);
}
protected abstract void turnTaken(R value);
}
class XPlayer implements Player<Integer> {
@Override
public Integer takeTurn(Game<? super Integer> game) {
return 42;
}
}
class XGame extends AbstractGame<Integer> {
@Override
public void turnTaken(Integer value) {
System.out.println("value = " + value);
}
}
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] argv) {
XPlayer player = new XPlayer();
XGame game = new XGame();
game.play(player);
}
}
Now, any player who knows how to take R
-based moves can play any R
-based game.