How to start a Java project in Xcode?

I am currently programming Objective-C in the Xcode IDE, and I understand it should also support Java projects. When I open the IDE and choose New Project, I don’t find any project templates that correspond to Java. I have Snow Leopard, so I assume my Xcode is up-to-date.

How do I start a Java project in the Xcode IDE?


I think what you want is a “JNI Library” project, which has the description “This project builds a Java JNI library with a bundled application wrapper.” In Xcode 3.2, this project template can be found under Mac OS X > Framework & Library > JNI Library.

(Edit: This is what Apple officially recommends, too. See this document.)


Put external library to the JAR? [closed]

I have added some external libraries to my java project (in netbeans).
Is it possible to put the external jar library to the java archive (and not to put them into a separate (for example) “lib” directory)?


Of course you can. There are a few open source projects that can be downloaded with a “bundle jar” that contains all the dependencies.
You need to extract all the jars and then jar them again to one file.
An example of doing this with Ant can be seen here.


PSQLException: ERROR: relation “TABLE_NAME” does not exist

I am trying to run hibernate on a PostgreSQL 8.4.2 DB. Whenever I try to run a simple java code like:

List<User> users = service.findAllUsers();

I get the following error:

PSQLException: ERROR: relation "TABLE_NAME" does not exist

Since I have option hibernate.show_sql option set to true, I can see that hibernate is trying to run the following SQL command:

    select this_.USERNAME as USERNAME0_0_, this_.PASSWORD as PASSWORD0_0_ 
from "TABLE_NAME" this_

When in reality, it should at least run something like:

    select this_."USERNAME" as USERNAME0_0_, this_."PASSWORD" as PASSWORD0_0_ 
from "SCHEMA_NAME"."TABLE_NAME" as this_

Does anyone know what changes I need to make for Hibernate to produce the right SQL for PostgreSQL?

I have set up the necessary postgreSQL datasource in applicationContext.xml file:

<!-- Use Spring annotations -->
 <context:annotation-config /> 
 <!-- postgreSQL datasource -->
 <bean id="dataSource" class="org.apache.commons.dbcp.BasicDataSource"
  <property name="driverClassName" value="org.postgresql.Driver" />
  <property name="url"
   value="jdbc:postgresql://localhost/DB_NAME:5432/SCHEMA_NAME" />
  <property name="username" value="postgres" />
  <property name="password" value="password" />
  <property name="defaultAutoCommit" value="false" />

On the same file I have set up the session factory with PostgreSQL dialect:

<!-- Hibernate session factory -->
 <bean id="sessionFactory"   class="org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.annotation.AnnotationSessionFactoryBean">
  <property name="dataSource" ref="dataSource" />
  <property name="annotatedClasses">
  <property name="hibernateProperties">
    <prop key="hibernate.dialect">org.hibernate.dialect.PostgreSQLDialect</prop>
    <prop key="hibernate.show_sql">true</prop>
 <!-- setup transaction manager -->
 <bean id="transactionManager"
  <property name="sessionFactory">
   <ref bean="sessionFactory" />

Finally, the way I am mapping the domain class to the table is:

@Table(name = "`TABLE_NAME`")
public class User {
@Column(name = "USERNAME")
private String username;

Has anyone encountered a similar error?. Any help in solving this issue will be much appreciated. Please note that question is different to post Cannot simply use PostgreSQL table name (”relation does not exist”)

Apologies for the lengthy post.


You need to specify the schema name in the Spring’s Hibernate properties, not in the JDBC connection URL:

<prop key="hibernate.default_schema">SCHEMA_NAME</prop>

That said, your JDBC connection URL is in fact syntactically invalid. According to the PostgreSQL JDBC documentation you have to use one of the following syntaxes:

  • jdbc:postgresql:database
  • jdbc:postgresql://host/database
  • jdbc:postgresql://host:port/database

The database is here the database name. If the host is left away, it will default to localhost. If the port number is left away, it will just default to 5432. Thus, one of the following is valid in your case:

  • jdbc:postgresql:DB_NAME
  • jdbc:postgresql://localhost/DB_NAME
  • jdbc:postgresql://localhost:5432/DB_NAME

Is quitting an application frowned upon?

Moving on in my attempt to learn Android, I just read the following:

Question: Does the user have a choice to kill the application
unless we put a menu option in to kill it? If no such option exists,
how does the user terminate the application?

Answer: (Romain Guy): The user doesn’t, the system handles this automatically. That’s what the activity lifecycle (especially onPause/onStop/onDestroy) is for. No matter what you do, do not put a “quit” or “exit” application button. It is useless with Android’s application model. This is also contrary to how core applications work.

Hehe, for every step I take in the Android world I run into some sort of problem =(

Apparently, you cannot quit an application in Android (but the Android system can very well totally destroy your app whenever it feels like it). What’s up with that? I am starting to think that it’s impossible to write an app that functions as a “normal app” – that the user can quit the app when he/she decides to do so. That is not something that should be relied upon the OS to do.

The application I am trying to create is not an application for the Android Market. It is not an application for “wide use” by the general public, it is a business app that is going to be used in a very narrow business field.

I was actually really looking forward to developing for the Android platform, since it addresses a lot of issues that exist in Windows Mobile and .NET. However, the last week has been somewhat of a turnoff for me… I hope I don’t have to abandon Android, but it doesn’t look very good right now =(

Is there a way for me to really quit the application?


This will eventually get to your question, but I first want to address a number of issues you raise in your various comments to the various answers already given at the time of this writing. I have no intention of changing your mind — rather, these are here for others who come to read this post in the future.

The point is that I cannot allow for
Android to determine when my app is
going to be terminated. that must be
the choice of the user.

Millions of people are perfectly happy with the model where the environment closes up the application as needed. Those users simply don’t think about “terminating” the Android app, any more than they think about “terminating” a Web page or “terminating” a thermostat.

iPhone users are much the same way, in that pressing the iPhone button does not necessarily “feel” like the app was terminated since many iPhone apps pick up where the user left off, even if the app really was shut down (since iPhone only allows one third-party app at a time, at present).

As I said above, there is a lot of
things going on in my app (data being
PUSHed to the device, lists with tasks
that always should be there, etc.).

I don’t know what “lists with tasks that always should be there” means, but the “data being PUSHed to the device” is a pleasant fiction and should not be done by activity in any case. Use a scheduled task (via AlarmManager) to update your data for maximum reliability.

Our users log in and can’t be doing
that every time they get a phone call
and Android decides to kill the app.

There are many iPhone and Android applications that deal with this. Usually, it is because they hold onto login credentials, rather than forcing users to log in every time manually.

For example, we want to check updates
when exiting the application

That is a mistake on any operating system. For all you know, the reason your application is being “exited” is because the OS is shutting down, and then your update process will fail mid-stream. Generally, that’s not a good thing. Either check updates on start or check updates totally asynchronously (e.g., via a scheduled task), never on exit.

Some comments suggest that hitting the
back button does not kill the app at
all (see link in my question above).

Pressing the BACK button does not “kill the app”. It finishes the activity that was on-screen when the user pressed the BACK button.

It should only terminate when the
users want to terminate it – never
ever any other way. If you can’t write
apps that behave like that in Android,
then I think that Android can’t be used
for writing real apps =(

Then neither can Web applications. Or WebOS, if I understand their model correctly (haven’t had a chance to play with one yet). In all of those, users don’t “terminate” anything — they just leave. iPhone is a bit different, in that it only presently allows one thing to run at a time (with a few exceptions), and so the act of leaving implies a fairly immediate termination of the app.

Is there a way for me to really quit
the application?

As everybody else told you, users (via BACK) or your code (via finish()) can close up your currently-running activity. Users generally don’t need anything else, for properly-written applications, any more than they need a “quit” option for using Web applications.

No two application environments are the same, by definition. This means that you can see trends in environments as new ones arise and others get buried.

For example, there is a growing movement to try to eliminate the notion of the “file”. Most Web applications don’t force users to think of files. iPhone apps typically don’t force users to think of files. Android apps generally don’t force users to think of files. And so on.

Similarly, there is a growing movement to try to eliminate the notion of “terminating” an app. Most Web applications don’t force the user to log out, but rather implicitly log the user out after a period of inactivity. Same thing with Android, and to a lesser extent, iPhone (and possibly WebOS).

This requires more emphasis on application design, focusing on business goals, and not sticking with an implementation model tied to a previous application environment. Developers who lack the time or inclination to do this will get frustrated with newer environments that break their existing mental model. This is not the fault of either environment, any more than it is the fault of a mountain for storms flowing around it rather than through it.

For example, some development environments, like Hypercard and Smalltalk, had the application and the development tools co-mingled in one setup. This concept did not catch on much, outside of language extensions to apps (e.g., VBA in Excel, Lisp in AutoCAD). Developers who came up with mental models that presumed the existence of development tools in the app itself, therefore, either had to change their model or limit themselves to environments where their model would hold true.

So, when you write:

Along with other messy things I
discovered, I think that developing
our app for Android is not going to

That would appear to be for the best, for you, for right now. Similarly, I would counsel you against attempting to port your application to the Web, since some of the same problems you have reported with Android you will find in Web applications as well (e.g., no “termination”). Or, conversely, someday if you do port your app to the Web, you may find that the Web application’s flow may be a better match for Android, and you can revisit an Android port at that time.


Java automatic unboxing – is there a compiler warning?

I am a big fan of auto-boxing in Java as it saves a lot of ugly boiler plate code. However I have found auto-unboxing to be confusing in some circumstances where the Number object may be null. Is there any way to detect where auto-unboxing is occurring in a codebase with a javac warning? Any other solution to detect occurrences of unboxing only (such as FindBugs or Eclipse-specific compiler warning) would be appreciated as I cannot find any.

To clarify I do not want any warnings to be generated on boxing – only unboxing.

Here is a simple example of some code that can cause confusing NullPointerExceptions:

class Test {
    private Integer value;

    public int getValue() {
        return value;


Eclipse will let you syntax-color boxing and unboxing operations (but not one or the other). I have them set to bright red: if either happens, it means that I’ve been sloppy in matching parameters and arguments.

Source: stackoverflow
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy, and Copyright Policy. Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless otherwise noted. The answers/resolutions are collected from stackoverflow, are licensed under cc by-sa 2.5 , cc by-sa 3.0 and cc by-sa 4.0 © No Copyrights, All Questions are retrived from public domain..