The name reflection is used to describe code which is able to inspect other code in the same system (or itself).
For example, say you have an object of an unknown type in Java, and you would like to call a 'doSomething' method on it if one exists. Java's static typing system isn't really designed to support this unless the object conforms to a known interface, but using reflection, your code can look at the object and find out if it has a method called 'doSomething' and then call it if you want to.
So, to give you a code example of this in Java (imagine the object in question is foo) :
Method method = foo.getClass().getMethod("doSomething", null);
method.invoke(foo, null);
One very common use case in Java is the usage with annotations. JUnit 4, for example, will use reflection to look through your classes for methods tagged with the @Test annotation, and will then call them when running the unit test.
There are some good reflection examples to get you started at http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/reflect/index.html
And finally, yes, the concepts are pretty much similar in other statically typed languages which support reflection (like C#). In dynamically typed languages, the use case described above is less necessary (since the compiler will allow any method to be called on any object, failing at runtime if it does not exist), but the second case of looking for methods which are marked or work in a certain way is still common.
Update from a comment:
The ability to inspect the code in the system and see object types is
not reflection, but rather Type Introspection. Reflection is then the
ability to make modifications at runtime by making use of
introspection. The distinction is necessary here as some languages
support introspection, but do not support reflection. One such example
is C++
There are several differences between HashMap
and Hashtable
in Java:
Hashtable
is synchronized, whereas HashMap
is not. This makes HashMap
better for non-threaded applications, as unsynchronized Objects typically perform better than synchronized ones.
Hashtable
does not allow null
keys or values. HashMap
allows one null
key and any number of null
values.
One of HashMap's subclasses is LinkedHashMap
, so in the event that you'd want predictable iteration order (which is insertion order by default), you could easily swap out the HashMap
for a LinkedHashMap
. This wouldn't be as easy if you were using Hashtable
.
Since synchronization is not an issue for you, I'd recommend HashMap
. If synchronization becomes an issue, you may also look at ConcurrentHashMap
.
Best Solution
I'm not sure there is a "best" way to initialize a bean. I think there are pros and cons to each, and depending on the situation, one or the other might be appropriate. This certainly isn't an exhaustive list, but here are some things to consider.
Using a constructor allows you to have an immutable bean. Immutable objects are good if you can fit them in your design. They don't require copying, serialized access or other special handling between threads. If you have setters, your object isn't immutable. Using a constructor also ensures the object is properly initialized. After the constructor finishes, the object is valid. If your object requires the use of setters to initialize it, it's possible to have an invalid object.
On the other hand, using constructors often leads to a telescoping problem. Often times you'll need many different constructors, most of which will be a superset of another constructor. Often times these are for convenience. For instance:
One alternative to this that I very much like is the so called "enhanced" builder pattern presented by Josh Bloch at JavaOne. You can see this in his book "Effective Java, Second Edition". If you look at the way the pattern is used, it will also solve your "afterProperties" method issue. The builder pattern will guarantee the object is correctly initialized.
Here is an additional blog post discussing the pattern: http://www.screaming-penguin.com/node/7598
I'm not sure this fits into your spring requirement, but in general, I'm a big fan of builder.