reference calling object

Is there a (reasonable) way to reference the calling object without explicitly passing "this". Or in other words, does the called object know who called it?

Thanks!



LVL 3
adgAsked:
Who is Participating?

Improve company productivity with a Business Account.Sign Up

x
 
objectsConnect With a Mentor Commented:
try this:

StackTraceElement[] trace = new Exception().getStackTrace();
String classname = trace[trace.length-2].getClassName();
0
 
objectsCommented:
no
0
 
adgAuthor Commented:
Thats what I thought.
0
Get your problem seen by more experts

Be seen. Boost your question’s priority for more expert views and faster solutions

 
sciuriwareCommented:
There should be a way digging in the assembly code.
But, what's the purpose?
;JOOP!
0
 
tomboshellCommented:
Could throw and catch an exception and parse the trace, then use some reflection.
0
 
objectsCommented:
> Could throw and catch an exception and parse the trace

that'd only get you the method, not the object.
0
 
sciuriwareConnect With a Mentor Commented:
Well, this way of working would reveal the classes.
But still not the object itself.
;JOOP!
0
 
tomboshellConnect With a Mentor Commented:
If it is simply to identify what called it then that is good.  If it is desired to invoke methods on the caller then it of course would not work that well, except for final static methods and such.  Since the trace-to-reflection route would create a new object and not the calling object, but it would be an object of the same class/type.  
That would be a kinda crazy way and due to the reflection not the best for performance, so a call back object being passed to the class is the best for such purposes.  But it could be fun! And also provide lots of entertainment by debugging and maintaining.
0
 
objectsCommented:
> but it would be an object of the same class/type.  

but very different state.
and how would you create it?
0
 
adgAuthor Commented:
Wow, I hadn't realized all these nuances. In this case, I'm just interested in identifying the class of the caller. But I know that isn't exactly what I asked (because I didn't know any better).

>> But it could be fun! And also provide lots of entertainment by debugging and maintaining
Hah, just what I need!

I'm going to raise the points and split them. Thanks for all your help!
0
 
tomboshellCommented:
Thanks for the grade!

>> how would you create it?  
I would have to be a bit obtuse and say that it depends.  could do a classForName or use the class loader (hopefully it is the same) or use findClass(String name), could access a helper class (or a factory) with the string name, which I think would be preferrable.  It depends on where the class is and what constructors are available, if it is that person's class or a library, if it allows for construction outside of the package, what parameters if any, and prob other considerations that I did not mention.

>> but very different state.
I know, that is why it is not a very good way of reference, but it may be good just to get the name.  Otherwise, if it is just for knoweldge I would say to use a debugger and set a breakpoint at the part in the code that is of interest.
0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.