aspose file tools*
The moose likes Beginning Java and the fly likes Why is clone() method protected? Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Java » Beginning Java
Bookmark "Why is clone() method protected?" Watch "Why is clone() method protected?" New topic
Author

Why is clone() method protected?

Gjorgi Var
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 24, 2004
Posts: 85
If the "protected" access atribute means access only through subclasses and if Object class is on the top of the hierarchy with all the other classes being its subclasses, why is clone() method protected then? Maybe because sometimes we would need to override it with a clone() that has more-restrictive-than-public atribute? If so, when does such a need arise?
C. Nimo
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 23, 2004
Posts: 82
Almost, I think.
Suppose it was public. That means that you can call clone() from any other class. Now - you don't want to do this, because you want to control the call for clone() on your objects.
Also, you can always declare your class final - and that's where you end the inheritance. So - if you can't extend class X - you can't get its clone() method as well.
Nimo.
clio katz
Ranch Hand

Joined: Apr 30, 2004
Posts: 101
clone() is a mystery wrapped in a riddle:
(1) clone() will not function unless class also implements Cloneable
(2) Object itself doesn't implement Cloneable, so you can't invoke clone() directly .. only on a Cloneable sub-class
(3) Even as a sub-class of Object, you can't clone() unless you implement the Cloneable interface, yet the Cloneable interface (like Serializable) has no methods!
Viewed this way, the 'protected' modifier makes sense:-) The bigger picture adds up to a restrictive invocation environment for clone()
since neither cloning nor serialization are not guaranteed to succeed (especially on 'mutable' objects), it is probably healthy to be forced to do an explicit implementation, and deal with exceptions then and there
there's also a security perspective - if you could clone() *all* Object subclasses by default ... security would be, well, pretty messy.
As it is, you have much more control. You can
1. implement Cloneable, and let Object manage the clone() , and just handle exceptions,
2. implement Cloneable, and explicitly manage (what gets cloned and how) in your clone() method
3. passively prohibit cloning of your objects by *not* implementing Cloneable, or
4. actively prohibit cloning by implementing Cloneable and throwing a CloneNotSupportedException in the clone() method

hth
 
I agree. Here's the link: http://aspose.com/file-tools
 
subject: Why is clone() method protected?
 
Similar Threads
By using Cloneable Method
clone() and protected access
why can't we call clone() method?
Shallow Copy implementation Question
Cloning in Java