Copying Player object to a new object implementing modified Player interface (extends Player)

My wording might be a bit confusing, but here's what I'm needing to accomplish:

I've currently created an ActivePlayer.java class implementing my SAPlayer.java interface that extends Player (org.bukkit.entity.Player). The issue I'm running into is that, for every online player at a certain point, I need to convert them all to an ActivePlayer instead of a Player; however, I have no idea how I would accomplish this.

 

Wolfy9247
Well I guess there are a few ways you could do this.

• Make a listener for the PlayerJoinEvent and when a player joins you can add them to a list/map/collection/set as a new ActivePlayer. Map for example:

Code:

Player player = event.getPlayer();
String playerName = player.getName();
ActivePlayer activePlayer = new ActivePlayer(playerName); // Assuming it's constructor takes a string for a name
activePlayerMap.put(playerName, activePlayer);

Ensure if you do it this way you similarly remove the player from the map on the PlayerQuitEvent.

• You could have a repeating task run every X amount of time to parse through all online players and add / remove from a map/collection/list/set accordingly.

 

You should make your class extend CraftPlayer (since you are messing with Craftbukkit stuff when implementing the bukkit api) and have to replace the default playerlist with yours. I don't see why you can't just have a HashMap or something to save stuff for every online player. Thats way easier than what you are attempting.

 

mncat77: Creating a LinkedHashMap has been my alternative for this project; however, it would help to be more integrated with what I'm doing if I could have a player with both my added methods, and the default Player methods.

For example: A new game is started, a list is updated with all current active players on the server. Those players are assigned both a target, and a killer. Let's say that a target quits, the killer will need to be assigned a new target. Easily I can get the target player by getting the ActivePlayer object with the Player object as a key from a HashMap. From this, I can call player.getAssassin() and get an ActivePlayer instance of the assassin in that map. Now I need to send that player a message, which I could do by putting the Player instance in the ActivePlayer object and calling player.getPlayer().sendMessage(), but I just hate having to do that instead of just doing player.sendMessage() (and I do realize that I could implement sendMessage() in there, but I don't want to make a copy of every method to call on another method and so on).

 

Wolfy9247
You don't need to extend, or implement anything now that I think of it...
Simply make something like this:

Code:

package com.github.pixelwingz;
 
import org.bukkit.Bukkit;
import org.bukkit.entity.Player;
 
public class ActivePlayer {
 
    private Player player;
    private String name;
    private String target;
   
    public ActivePlayer(String name) {
        this.name = name;
        setPlayer(this.name);
    }
   
    public Player getPlayer() {
        return this.player;
    }
   
    public void setPlayer(String name) {
        this.player = Bukkit.getPlayer(this.name);
    }
   
    public String getTarget() {
        return this.target;
    }
   
    public void setTarget(String target) {
        this.target = target;
    } 
   
}

If you want to use Player methods, simply use the getPlayer() method...
Make a new ActivePlayer like this: (would be useful onJoin or something)

Code:

ActivePlayer aPlayer = new ActivePlayer(event.getPlayer().getName());

Messaging Class I whipped up for you:
https://gist.github.com/pixelwingz/d5137b986f994976c090
Ensure you make a static method in your main (the class that extends JavaPlugin) like this perhaps:

Code:

public static Plugin getInstance() {
    return this;
}

This will allow you to use the Messaging.java class to it's full extent... I use methods of a Plugin in the class so if you wish not to have to do this simply remove anything related or make it a non-static class (since I am using it as an all static method class and it can't be instantiated at the moment).