Function Outside the Class

Is it possible to write a java function outside the class?
Let me illustrate here:
ex:
class test
{
int a,b;
boolean equals(Test o)
{
//body of equals
}
}
here definition of fun equals is written inside the class test.
Ques --- but i want to write the definition of fun equals outside the class
becos it's very long.
How can i do this.
in c++ i can write
class test
{
int a,b;
boolean equals(Tet o);
}//end of class test
boolean test::equals()
{
body of fun
} :roll:

Hi,
Java didnot allow such conventions. You have to declare all the methods within the same class definition.
Also you cannot have a free floating function - global function as in c++, in Java, even for a static method it should be contained in a class.

well...not totally. You can't do it at compile time, but you can do it on the fly. You can add bytes to a class on the fly. If you know the Java Virtual machine spec, you can do it, but i think you might also be able to do it with Apache's BCEL: http://jakarta.apache.org/bcel/index.html
Not exactly the same as what you're thinking of in C++, but pretty close. There are also other options. Make your class abstract, and don't implement that method. make an interface. But, yeah, you could create the byte-code for a method and tie it to a class at runtime.

Hi Robert,
The argument is that whether the Java as a language supports such as feature and not whether there is an alternate way to acheive that.
Please don't scare me by saying some bytecode can be attached at runtime.

Amal Gupta Java Guy,
Please change your name to be compliant with JavaRanch's naming policy.
Your displayed name should be 2 separate names with more than 1 letter each and not be OBVIOSLY FICTICIOUS. We really would prefer that you use your REAL name.
You can change your name: here.
Thanks,
Cindy

Vijayakumar,
1. I'm not scaring you, it's a great feature!

2. The addition of bytecode IS the java language.
The Java language/runtime allows this and has it as a part of its features. It's a great thing, and frankly I don't see how your C++ version is any less scary or insecure as adding bytecode. Why can't I come in with my own C++ class in the same namespace and make an implementation of this method?

Before resorting to something like that, why do you feel you need to have a function outside of a class?
I'm sure that there is a simple design solution that doesn't involve scary features.
hth,
bear