Problems in java.util.Observable

Consider Observable pattern.

The way its implemented in java is full of flaws.

1. Observable is a class, not an interface, and worse, it doesn’t even implement an interface. Unfortunately, the java.util.Observable implementation has a number of problems that limit its usefulness and reuse. That’s not to say it doesn’t provide some utility, but there are some large potholes to watch out for. So from design point of view its bad in 2 ways:

   A) Because Observable is a class, you have to subclass it. That means you can’t add on the Observable behavior to an existing class that already extends another superclass. This limits its reuse potential (and isn’t that why we are using patterns in the first place?).
   B) Because there isn’t an Observable interface, you can’t even create your own implementation that plays well with Java’s built-in Observer API. Nor do you have the option of swapping out the java.util implementation for another (say, a new, multithreaded implementation).

2. Observable may serve your needs if you can extend java.util.Observable. On the other hand, you may need to roll your own implementation as we did at the beginning of the chapter. In either case, you know the Observer Pattern well and you’re in a good position to work with any API that makes use of the pattern.

3. If you look at the Observable API, the setChanged() method is protected. So what? Well, this means you can’t call setChanged() unless you’ve subclassed Observable. This means you can’t even create an instance of the Observable class and compose it with your own objects, you have to subclass. The design violates a second design principle here…favor composition over inheritance.