java define class with name Object

Question

I created a class with name Object in a package java.lang. In some another package I created Main class. Now in main method of Main class when I write new Main() and put a dot after that I don't see equals(), wait() etc.. i.e methods of actual Object class.

My question is don't you think creating an class with name Object(specially with java.lang package) should not be allowed. As Object class is by default inherited by all classes so in my case whatever class I define will automatically inherit my class instead of actual object class because class name and package name of my object class is same as that of actual object class.

I didn't wanted to achieve anything. I was just testing whether creating a class with name Object with java.lang package is allowed or not. — Sandy
– Sandy, Commented Aug 16, 2012 at 12:07
You've found a nice quirk. I can imagine some uses for it. I don't think the language should restrict you from doing that. Most sensible people won't do it and in my opinion the language does not need to go ways to prevent people from shooting themselves in the foot. — Kasper van den Berg
– Kasper van den Berg, Commented Aug 16, 2012 at 12:09
Isn't this already loaded by system(or boot) class loader? And if you create same object in same package it wont be picked/used in your application. — srikanth yaradla
– srikanth yaradla, Commented Aug 16, 2012 at 12:10
@KaspervandenBerg: I agree no one with some brain would like to do that. You also said you can imagine some uses of it, can you please explain a scenario where this could be done. — Sandy
– Sandy, Commented Aug 16, 2012 at 12:12

pcalcao · Accepted Answer · 2012-08-16 12:06:16Z

3

This is quite an open-ended question.

Should it be allowed? Why not, if you know what you're doing, go crazy.

I agree it's somewhat dangerous theoretically, but I don't see how someone would do this by mistake. If someone actually wants to redefine the whole Object class for some reason, academical for instance, then he/she can do so at his/her own risk.

No language can fully prevent you from putting an arrow to your own knee.

answered Aug 16, 2012 at 12:06

pcalcao

16k1 gold badge49 silver badges65 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

2 Comments

srikanth yaradla Over a year ago

Isn't this already loaded by system(or boot) class loader? And if you create same object in same package it wont be picked/used in your application.

pcalcao Over a year ago

Indeed, you are right. You'd have to use a specific class loader to force this behavior. Again, only use I can think of is purely academic.

srikanth yaradla · Accepted Answer · 2012-08-16 12:32:45Z

0

I can confirm that even if you write one it wont be useful (at least With usual java classloading) The ones in java.lang take the precedence as they are already loaded by system class loader and your Object class will never be picked and calling any custom methods will only result in runtime errors(java.lang.NoSuchMethodError)

But I am not certain about the behavior when you use a custom class loader and override its loadClass method such a way that it explicitly loads your class byte but does not do a lookup in parent classloader. May be home work :)

answered Aug 16, 2012 at 12:32

srikanth yaradla

1,23510 silver badges13 bronze badges

Comments

RP- · Accepted Answer · 2012-08-16 13:37:01Z

I use this trick (having some third party same package and class name in our classpath) often to override the functionality of the third party libraries if I cannot wrap them up.
In any case, All the system classes has to be loaded into jvm before the client program (our application) to load. It is all to deal with the ClassLoader, compiler allowing it because it really don't care too much about all the classes, but while runtime, JVM classloaders will consider these things, If you look at the source code of the default ClassLoader (oracle jdk), You can see there will be a check that you should not have any package start with java.

private ProtectionDomain preDefineClass(String name,
                        ProtectionDomain protectionDomain)
    {
    ...
    if ((name != null) && name.startsWith("java.")) {
        throw new SecurityException("Prohibited package name: " +
                    name.substring(0, name.lastIndexOf('.')));
    }
...
}

Even with famous bite code instrumentation tools like javaassist will restrict this kind of behavior, they will have a check whether a class can be instrumented or not Instrumentation.isModifiableClass.
Finally, it all depends upon the ClassLoader implementation and as it has to stick with the specifications, You need to consider the order of classes from class path to load.

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

java define class with name Object

3 Answers 3

2 Comments

Comments

Comments

Your Answer

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

3 Answers 3

2 Comments

Comments

Comments

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Related