Develop Reference

Java List removing items without any action

I'm facing a weird behavior in my Java code using List.
The code is very simple, I have a List of Object called AccessRequest which comes from a database and I'm using this first List to create a new one but with a filter to select only a few objects.
Here is the code :
private void updateCommentIfNeeded() {
List<AccessRequest> accessRequestList = getAllRequest();
List<AccessRequest> commentsList = getCommentsListProcessedManually(accessRequestList);
}
public List<AccessRequest> getCommentsListProcessedManually(List<AccessRequest> accessRequests) {
accessRequests.removeIf(ar -> !ar.getComment().equals("To be processed manually"));
if (accessRequests.size() != 0) {
SQLServerConnection sqlServerConnection = new SQLServerConnection(sqlServerUrl);
accessRequests.removeIf(ar -> !sqlServerConnection.emailExists(ar.getEmail()));
}
return accessRequests;
}
I'm supposed to get a second List only containing the objects that has their comments to To be processed manually, which I do. But the weird part is that the first List also takes the value of the second as if I wrote accessRequestList = commentsList but there is no such thing and I'm using local variable.
Ex :
I have 3 objects in my first List, but only one containing the required comment
Both list ends with containing the only objects containing the comment
I'm kind of lost here if anyone has an idea !

Your method getCommentsListProcessedManually modifies the list you're passing. I believe you're operating under the assumption that passing the list as a parameter somehow creates a copy of the list, whereas what is actually happening is that a reference to the list is passed by value.
There are several ways to solve this, but the easiest is to simply create a copy of your input list at the start of your method:
public List<AccessRequest> getCommentsListProcessedManually(List<AccessRequest> input) {
List<AccessRequest> accessRequests = new ArrayList<>(input);
accessRequests.removeIf(ar -> !ar.getComment().equals("To be processed manually"));
if (accessRequests.size() != 0) {
SQLServerConnection sqlServerConnection = new SQLServerConnection(sqlServerUrl);
accessRequests.removeIf(ar -> !sqlServerConnection.emailExists(ar.getEmail()));
}
return accessRequests;
}
You could also use the Stream API for this (using the filter operation), but that's quite a bit trickier in this situation.

You are passing a reference of the list to the method getCommentsListProcessedManually.
So accessRequestList and the one passed as a parameter are the same, hence any operation done to the list is done to the same list.
You can create a copy of the list before passing it as a parameter:
List<AccessRequest> newList = new ArrayList<AccessRequest>(accessRequestList);

Return a list from list.forEach with Java Streaming API

I have a POJO:
class MyObject {
private Double a;
private String b;
//constructor, getter + setter
}
Some function is creating a list of this POJO. Some values for a might be null, so I want to replace them with 0.0. At the moment I am doing it like this.
public List<MyObject> fetchMyObjects(Predicate predicate) {
List<MyObject> list = getMyListsOfTheDatabase(predicate);
list
.forEach(myObject -> {
if (myObject.getA() == null) {
myObject.setA(0.0);
}
});
return list;
}
Is there a way to integrate the forEach in the return? Something like
return list
.stream()
.someStatement();
It's not about, if this is the best place to convert the nulls to zero, but rather a questions to better understand the streaming api.

Use the peek function
Returns a stream consisting of the elements of this stream, additionally performing the provided action on each element as elements are consumed from the resulting stream.
public List<MyObject> fetchMyObjects(Predicate predicate) {
return getMyListsOfTheDatabase(predicate)
.stream()
.peek(it -> if(it.getA() == null) it.setA(0.0))
.collect(Collectors.toList());
}

While others have been happy to answer your question as it stands, allow me to step a step back and give you the answer you didn’t ask for (but maybe the answer that you want): You don’t want to do that. A stream operation should be free from side effects. What you are asking for is exactly a stream operation that has the side effect of modifying the original objects going into the stream. Such is poor code style and likely to confuse those reading your code after you.
The code you already have solves your problem much more nicely than any combined stream pipeline.
What you may want to have if you can modify your POJO is either a constructor that sets a to 0 if null was retrieved from the database, or method that does it that you may call from list.forEach:
list.forEach(MyObject::setAToZeroIfNull);
It's not about, if this is the best place to convert the nulls to
zero, but rather a questions to better understand the streaming api.
That’s fair. In any case I will let this answer stand for anyone else popping by.

You can't return the same List instance with a single statement, but you can return a new List instance containing the same (possibly modified) elements:
return list.stream()
.map(myObject -> {
if (myObject.getA() == null) {
myObject.setA(0.0);
}
return myObject;
})
.collect(Collectors.toList());

Actually you should be using List::replaceAll:
list.replaceAll(x -> {
if(x.getA() == null) x.setA(0.0D);
return x;
})

forEach doesn't have a return value, so what you might be looking for is map
return list
.stream()
.map(e -> {
if (e.getA() == null) e.setA(0d);
return e;
})
.whateverElse()...

The following would be fine:
list.stream()
.filter(obj -> obj.getA() == null)
.forEach(obj -> obj.setA(0.0));
return list;
However in your case just returning a Stream might be more appropriate (depends):
public Stream<MyObject> fetchMyObjects(Predicate predicate) {
return getMyListsOfTheDatabase(predicate);
}
public Stream<MyObject> streamMyObjects(List<MyObject> list) {
return list.stream()
.peek(obj -> {
if (obj.getA() == null) {
obj.setA(0.0);
}
});
}
I personally never used peek, but here it corrects values.
On code conventions, which are more string in the java community:
Indentation: Java took 4 as opposed to C++'s 3 as more separate methods,
and less indentation was expected. Debatable but okay.
For generic type parameters often a single capital like T, C, S.
For lambda parameters short names, often a single letter, hence I used obj.

What is flatMapPublisher in RxJava2?

What is the purpose of flatMapPublisher ?
return factory.retrieveDiskDataStore().isCached()
.flatMapPublisher {
factory.retrieveDataStore(it).getData(token)
}
.flatMap {
Flowable.just(if (it is PickupListDataModel) mapper.mapFromData(it) else null)
}
.flatMap {
saveData(it).toSingle { it }.toFlowable()
}
In this code, factory.retrieveDiskDataStore().isCached() checks whether the information is stored in database or not.
If not, then following code executes
.flatMapPublisher {
factory.retrieveDataStore(it).getData(token)
}

From the JavaDocs:
Returns a Flowable that emits items based on applying a specified function to the item emitted by the source Single, where that function returns a Publisher.
In other terms, a Single will succeed with a value which you'd like to turn into a sequence of values generated by a Publisher (i.e., some Flowable, Flux or other standard Reactive Streams source) and have the items of that.

Iterables.transform is not iterating through my List

analyticsDatabases is of type -
private final Iterable<Database> analyticsDatabases;
And I use below code snippet inside a method, and I have one element in analyticsDatabases List. When I do a for loop all works fine, but I am curious why my Iterables.transform doesn't work.
Iterable<Iterable<ObjectId>> finalR = Iterables.transform(analyticsDatabases, new Function<Database, Iterable<ObjectId>>() {
#Nullable
#Override
public Iterable<ObjectId> apply(#Nullable Database database) {
if (database != null) {
return database.deleteItemsById(filterIds, storableType, writeAckStrategy);
}
`enter code here`
return null;
}
});

The javadoc of Iterables states
Performance notes: Unless otherwise noted, all of the iterables
produced in this class are lazy, which means that their iterators only
advance the backing iteration when absolutely necessary.
In other words, transform doesn't apply the given Function. It returns an Iterable that will apply the Function as elements are requested.

Need help stepping through a java iterator

Say I have already created an iterator called "iter" and an arraylist called "database". I want to be able to look through the arraylist and see if any element in the arraylist is equal to a String called "test". If it is, then I would like to add the element to another list.
while(iter.hasNext()) {
if(database.next() == test) {
database.next().add(another_list);
}
}
What am I doing wrong? I'm completely new to iterators in java. Do I need to write my own iterator class? Any code examples would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

The problem with your code is that every time you call .next(), it advances the iterator forward to the next position. This means that this code
if(database.next() == test) {
database.next().add(another_list);
}
Won't work as intended, because the first call to database.next() will not give back the same value as the second call to database.next(). To fix this, you'll want to make a temporary variable to hold on to the new value, as seen here:
while(iter.hasNext()) {
/* type */ curr = iter.next();
if(curr == test) {
curr.add(another_list);
}
}
(Filling in the real type of what's being iterated over in place of /* type */)
In many cases, though, you don't need to use iterators explicitly. Most of the Collections types implement the Iterable interface, in which case you can just write
/* container */ c;
for(/* type */ curr: c) {
if(curr == test) {
curr.add(another_list);
}
}
Hope this helps!

if(database.contains("test"))
{
another_list.add("test");
}
you can use the built in method contains(...)
you should use equals(...) for data comparisions
look at the javadoc to see if there is already a method present for your purpose