I have a Map in Java like so,
private HashMap<String, Object[][]> theMap;
Where the key is a String and the entry is going to be something along the line of,
theMap = new HashMap<>();
Object[][] theData = {
{Boolean.FALSE, "Text"}
};
theMap.put("Key1", theData);
Somewhere along the line I would like to check if an entry in the map is equivalent to another object. Currently I am doing it like this,
Object[][] tempData = {
{Boolean.FALSE, "Text"}
};
for(Object key: entries.keySet()) {
if(entries.get(key).equals(tempData)) {
entries.remove(key);
}
}
And it is not working.
I would prefer the comparison to be done with an object rather than with another map. I'm wondering what I'm doing wrong with this comparison here?
The reason you are not getting equality is that arrays inherit Object#equals() which is based on identity, not equality of contents. You could consider using java.util.Arrays.deepEquals(Object[], Object[]) to compare.
That is the answer to the immediate question. However, using a 2-dimensional array of Object to hold a boolean and a String is really bad code smell and indicates you need to encapsulate what you are putting in the array.
Identity vs Equivalence
Please make sure that you understand that by default the equals() method of Object checks on whether two object references are referring to the same object (identity), which is not what your code is checking.
Instead, your code is checking whether the two objects (the values you put on the map) are having the same value (equivalence).
Here are two articles about this topic:
What is the difference between identity and equality in OOP?
Overriding equals method in Java
In this particular problem of yours, I think the solution involves two steps:
Your tempData and theData does not seems to be an array
of elements of the same type (it does not appear to be a 2-dimensional
array either). Instead, it contains a Boolean value and then a
String value. In this case, I think you really should think
through what this thingy is and design a class for it (I am showing
an example below)
The class should override the equals() (and hashCode()) methods
so that you can use its equals() for equivalence checking.
Note also that your IDE (e.g. Eclipse) probably can generate a template for equals() and hashCode() for you.
Example: (here I assume your Boolean represents a condition, and your String represents a message)
class MyRecord {
private Boolean condition;
private String message;
public Boolean getCondition() {
return condition;
}
public void setCondition(Boolean condition) {
this.condition = condition;
}
public String getMessage() {
return message;
}
public void setMessage(String message) {
this.message = message;
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
final int prime = 31;
int result = 1;
result = prime * result
+ ((condition == null) ? 0 : condition.hashCode());
result = prime * result
+ ((message == null) ? 0 : message.hashCode());
return result;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (this == obj)
return true;
if (obj == null)
return false;
if (getClass() != obj.getClass())
return false;
MyRecord other = (MyRecord) obj;
if (condition == null) {
if (other.condition != null)
return false;
} else if (!condition.equals(other.condition))
return false;
if (message == null) {
if (other.message != null)
return false;
} else if (!message.equals(other.message))
return false;
return true;
}
}
Related
I have a program which first generates a Hashmap with all allowed instances of a particular object, called BoardState, as the keys. I then iterate over the keyset, creating copies of the BoardState objects and performing transformations on them and then looking up the transformed objects in my statemap and updating their associated values. The problem is that when I use the contains() method on this keyset (either directly or by first creating a HashSet of the keys) it will sometimes return false for my new object even though the object does exist in the map.
I know that the obvious answer here is that there's something wrong with my implementation of either equals() or hashcode() in BoardState or one of its fields, and I would be inclined to agree. In fact I have been able to narrow the problem down somewhat. BoardState includes as an instance variable a HashSet of Box objects, which I also implemented, and setting the hashcode() method of Box to return a constant resolves the issue (though this obviously is not an acceptable solution).
The thing is, that when I am getting the error I can still iterate through my keyset and find the object by comparing using equals(). If I then output the hashcode for this object and the object I am checking against I get the same result for each, so I'm at a loss as to why it is that contains() is throwing an error.
I apologise if the below code is a bit meaty, I've tried to strip out what I can and only show what's relevant to the error.
public class BoardState {
private static int size;
private static int totalTokens;
private static HashMap<Colour, Integer> colours;
private static HashSet<Token> fullTokenSet;
private int inactiveBoxes;
private HashSet<Box> boxes;
private HashSet<Token> offBoardTokens;
public BoardState(...){...}
public boolean checkRemoveBox(final Box box,
final HashMap<BoardState, Boolean> stateMap) {
BoardState checkState = copy();
checkState.remove(box, box.getBoxColours());
if (!stateMap.keySet().contains(checkState)) {
for (BoardState state : stateMap.keySet()) {
if (state.equals(checkState)){
System.out.println("state hashcode: " + Objects.hash(state));
System.out.println("checkstate hashcode: " +
Objects.hash(checkState));
}
}
throw new IllegalStateException ("State not found.");
} else {
if (!stateMap.get(checkState)) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (this == o) return true;
if (o == null || getClass() != o.getClass()) return false;
BoardState state = (BoardState) o;
return size == state.size &&
inactiveBoxes == state.inactiveBoxes &&
totalTokens == state.totalTokens &&
boxes.equals(state.boxes) &&
fullTokenSet.equals(state.fullTokenSet) &&
offBoardTokens.equals(state.offBoardTokens) &&
colours.equals(state.colours);
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
return Objects.hash(inactiveBoxes, boxes, offBoardTokens);
}
}
public class Box {
private static int totalTokens;
private HashSet<Token> tokens;
Box(...) {...}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (this == o) return true;
if (o == null || getClass() != o.getClass()) return false;
Box box = (Box) o;
return totalTokens == box.totalTokens &&
Objects.equals(tokens, box.tokens);
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
return tokens.hashCode();
}
}
The given code gives the following output:
state hashcode: 157760
checkstate hashcode: 157760
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.IllegalStateException: State not found.
at game.BoardState.checkSplitBox(BoardState.java:306)
at game.BoardState.checkSplit(BoardState.java:284)
at game.Game.checkForP1Win(Game.java:173)
at game.Main.main(Main.java:11)
Process finished with exit code 1
I know that the below code gives the index of that particular element in java.
List<String> list = new ArrayList<>();
list .add("100");
Log.d("TAG",String.valueOf(list.indexOf("300")));
But how to get the index of an element while using a helper Class?
List<HelperClass> Arraylist= new ArrayList<>();
Arraylist.add(new HelperClass(name, email, phoneno));
Log.d("TAG", String.valueOf(new HelperClass(Arraylist.indexOf(name,email,phoneno))));
I searched everywhere for this but couldn't find. Can someone tell me how to find index of a particular item in arraylist while using modal to add data?
Obviously what I have tried is wrong and it shows red line under the whole line but I just typed that code for your understanding of what I want to achieve. Can someone give me a way please?
Helper
#Override
public int hashCode() {
int result = getName() != null ? getName().hashCode() : 0;
result = 31 * result + (Email != null ? Emaail.hashCode() : 0);
result = 31 * result + (PhoneNo!= null ? PhoneNo.hashCode() : 0);
return result;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (this == o) return true;
if (!(o instanceof Helper)) return false;
Helperthat = (Helper) o;
if (getName() != null ? !getName().equals(that.getName()) : that.getName() != null)
return false;
if (Email != null ? !Email.equals(that.Email) : that.Email != null)
return false;
if (PhoneNo != null ? !PhoneNo.equals(that.PhoneNo) : that.PhoneNo != null)
return false;
}
ArrayList#indexOf uses the Object#equals comparison method.
If you want to be able to lookup a HelperClass instance inside a Collection, you need to provide your own, overridden, equals method, and possibly also the hashCode one, for use with other, specific, Collection implementations (Map, Set, etc.).
class HelperClass {
...
#Override
public boolean equals(final Object object) {
if (object == this) {
return true;
}
if (!(object instance of HelperClass)) {
return false;
}
final HelperClass other = (HelperClass) object;
return name.equals(other.name) &&
email.equals(other.email) &&
phone.equals(other.phone);
}
}
You obviously need to have an appropriate HelperClass instance to find a match.
final String name = "Name";
final String email = "Email";
final String phone = "Phone";
final HelperClass first = new HelperClass(name, email, phone);
final HelperClass second = new HelperClass(name, email, phone);
final List<HelperClass> helpers = new ArrayList<>(8);
helpers.add(first);
final int index = helpers.indexOf(second); // index = 0
indexOf requires the object as input. If it does not find the object you are passing in, it will return -1. You need to pass the object whose location in the arraylist you are looking for as the input into the indexOf function.
Solution :
create a HelperClass to pass into the indexOf method:
.indexOf(new HelperClass(name, email, phoneno));
However that change by itself will still return -1. See the api doc for indexOf:
public int indexOf(Object o)
Returns the index of the first occurrence of the specified element in
this list, or -1 if this list does not contain the element. More
formally, returns the lowest index i such that (o==null ? get(i)==null
: o.equals(get(i))), or -1 if there is no such index.
It's using equals to decide whether it's found a match. You should have overridden the equals method on your HelperClass class, so it's using the default implementation in java.lang.Object, which compares the references, and only returns true if the two references HelperClass to the same object.
Override equals and hashcode on your HelperClass class, like:
#Override public boolean equals(Object other) {
if (!(other instanceof HelperClass)) {
return false;
}
HelperClass otherHelperClass = (HelperClass)other;
return otherHelperClass.x == this.x && otherHelperClass.y == this.y;
}
#Override public int hashCode() {
return x + y; // same values should hash to the same number
}
I have two collections which I am trying to compare for equality in my unit tests, but I am struggling with the contains method. Here is what I have:
#Test
public void getAllItems() {
Collection<Item> actualItems = auction.getAllItems(joe);
Collection<Item> expectedItems = Lists.newArrayList();
expectedItems.add(iPhone);
expectedItems.add(skateboard);
assertThat(expectedItems, contains(actualItems));
}
items contains the same objects as expectedItems so I would expect the assertion to be true but this is the output I get:
[Item{name=iPhone}, Item{name=Skateboard}] --> Expected
[Item{name=iPhone}, Item{name=Skateboard}] --> Actual
java.lang.AssertionError:
Expected: iterable containing [<[Item{name=iPhone}, Item{name=Skateboard}]>]
but: item 0: was <Item{name=iPhone}>
at org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat(MatcherAssert.java:20)
at org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat(MatcherAssert.java:8)
Please can you help me where I am going wrong with using the contains method?
public class Item {
private String name;
public Item(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public void setName(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
public String toString() {
return Objects.toStringHelper(this).add("name", name).toString();
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
final int prime = 31;
int result = 1;
result = prime * result + ((name == null) ? 0 : name.hashCode());
return result;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (this == obj)
return true;
if (obj == null)
return false;
if (getClass() != obj.getClass())
return false;
Item other = (Item) obj;
if (name == null) {
if (other.name != null)
return false;
} else if (!name.equals(other.name))
return false;
return true;
}
}
A Collection's .contains(...) uses the equals and hashCode methods of the Objects. In order to use equals (or in this case contains) on your own Objects, you need to override the equals and hashCode methods of your class. This is because Java uses references behind the scenes, so even though the field may be equal, the Object-references are not.
In Eclipse you can generate them using right-mouse click -> Source -> Generate hashCode() and equals().... But, since you never stated you use Eclipse, here is an example of the methods that are generated:
// Overriding this class' equals and hashCode methods for Object comparing purposes
// using the Collection's contains
// contains does the following behind the scenes: Check if both inputs aren't null,
// check if the HashCodes match, check if the Objects are equal.
// Therefore to use the Collection's contains for Objects with the same fields, we
// need to override the Object's equals and hashCode methods
// These methods below are generated by Eclipse itself using "Source -> Generate
// hashCode() and equals()..."
#Override
public int hashCode() {
final int prime = 31;
int result = 1;
result = prime * result + ((name == null) ? 0 : name.hashCode());
return result;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if(this == obj)
return true;
if(obj == null)
return false;
if(getClass() != obj.getClass())
return false;
Item other = (Item) obj;
if(name == null){
if(other.name != null)
return false;
}
else if(!name.equals(other.name))
return false;
return true;
}
If you add both of these to your Item-class, the contains will work.
EDIT:
I'm not sure, but when I look at your code I think the following might be wrong:
#Test
public void getAllItems() {
Collection<Item> actualItems = auction.getAllItems(joe);
Collection<Item> expectedItems = Lists.newArrayList();
// You first print both lists
System.out.println(expectedItems);
System.out.println(items);
// And then add the two items to the expectedItems
expectedItems.add(iPhone);
expectedItems.add(skateboard);
assertThat(expectedItems, contains(actualItems));
}
If you try the following instead:
#Test
public void getAllItems() {
Collection<Item> actualItems = auction.getAllItems(joe);
Collection<Item> expectedItems = Lists.newArrayList();
// First add both items
expectedItems.add(iPhone);
expectedItems.add(skateboard);
// Then print both lists
System.out.println(expectedItems);
System.out.println(items);
assertThat(expectedItems, contains(actualItems));
}
Does the expectedList now contain 4 items?
[Item{name=iPhone}, Item{name=Skateboard}, Item{name=iPhone}, Item{name=Skateboard}] --> Expected
[Item{name=iPhone}, Item{name=Skateboard}] --> Actual
In that case you shouldn't add the two items, since they are already present in the list.
Also, you're trying to use the contains on the entire list. Normally the contains is used to see if a single item is present in the list. So you could either use something like this:
for(Item i : expectedList){
assertTrue(actualList.contains(i));
}
or perhaps something like this, in case you use these libraries:
assertThat(actualList, is(expectedList));
I'm not sure if this is the cause and if this will fix it, since you use a different JUnit library then I usually do and I'm not sure if these syntax with the Asserts are possible.
I really don't think you actually need hamcrest for this. Wouldn't it be easier to make the asserts in one of the following ways:
A list is still an object at the end of the day:
org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(expected, actual)
An old fashion functionality for lists by using containsAll(..):
org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(expectedItems.containsAll(actualItems))
Using asserts for arrays' equality:
org.junit.Assert.assertArrayEquals(expectedItems.toArray(), actualItems.toArray())
Of course you can use hamcrest as well:
org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat(actual, Matchers.containsInAnyOrder(actual.toArray()));
OR
org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat(actual, Matchers.contains(actual.toArray()));
You basically asserting that expectedItems is a list with one element and this element is expected to be a list itself with the two items iPhone and skateboard.
To assert that expectedItems and actualItems have the same elements in the same order try this:
#Test
public void getAllItems() {
Collection<Item> actualItems = auction.getAllItems(joe);
assertThat(actualItems, contains(iPhone, skateboard));
}
And beware that assertThat expects the "actual" object as first parameter and not the "expected".
Alternatively you can do something like that:
#Test
public void getAllItems() {
Collection<Item> actualItems = auction.getAllItems(joe);
Collection<Item> expectedItems = Lists.newArrayList();
expectedItems.add(iPhone);
expectedItems.add(skateboard);
assertThat(actualItems, contains(expectedItems.toArray(new Item[expectedItems.size()])));
}
I have a class 'CoAutoria' that's suposed to hold 2 instances of an 'Author' class (which only has a name, for now) and the number of articles those authors have in common.
In order to figure out the top 10 of co-authors (regarding number of articles) I created a TreeSet of 'CoAutoria', to hold the total of articles, for each pair.
I need to cycle through a Map of years, gather the different authors and their respective Set of co-Authors. Then, for each pair, create an instance of 'CoAutoria' and: add it to the treeset (if it doesn't already exists); or simply sum its number of articles to the one existing on the set.
I already created the compareTo method, to insert it on the treeset, and created the equals method so that the order of the authors doesn't matter.
Here's the main code:`
public class CoAutoria implements Comparable<CoAutoria>
{
private Autor autor1;
private Autor autor2;
private int artigosComum;
(...)
}
#Override
public int compareTo(CoAutoria a2)
{
String thisAutor1 = autor1.getNome();
String thisAutor2 = autor2.getNome();
String caAutor1 = a2.getAutor1().getNome();
String caAutor2 = a2.getAutor2().getNome();
if((autor1.equals(a2.getAutor1()) && autor2.equals(a2.getAutor2())) || (autor1.equals(a2.getAutor2()) && autor2.equals(a2.getAutor1())))
{
return 0;
}
else
{
return 1;
}
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object o)
{
if(this == o)
{
return true;
}
if( o == null || o.getClass() != this.getClass())
return false;
CoAutoria ca = (CoAutoria) o;
String thisAutor1 = autor1.getNome();
String thisAutor2 = autor2.getNome();
String caAutor1 = ca.getAutor1().getNome();
String caAutor2 = ca.getAutor2().getNome();
if((thisAutor1.equals(caAutor1) && thisAutor2.equals(caAutor2)) || (thisAutor1.equals(caAutor2) && thisAutor2.equals(caAutor1)))
{
return true;
}
else
{
return false;
}
}
The main problem is: When I check if the set already has a certain instance of 'CoAutoria', (I'm using the contains() method of TreeSet), it gives me faulty results...sometimes it checks correctly that the Pair A-B already exists in that set (on the form of B-A), but sometimes it doesn't... For what I've read, the contains uses the equals method, so that's not suposed to happen..right?
[EDIT:]
Since the first post I started to think that maybe the problem resided on the compareTo..So I changed it to
public int compareTo(CoAutoria a2)
{
String thisAutor1 = autor1.getNome();
String thisAutor2 = autor2.getNome();
String caAutor1 = a2.getAutor1().getNome();
String caAutor2 = a2.getAutor2().getNome();
if(this.equals(a2))
{
System.out.println("return 0");
return 0;
}
else
{
int aux = thisAutor1.compareTo(caAutor1);
if(aux != 0)
{
return aux;
}
else
{
return thisAutor2.compareTo(caAutor2);
}
}
}
But it still gives my bad results..I thought I'd figured it now: if it's the same 'CoAutoria', I return 0, if not I go through the names, and order it by their compareTo values..but something's missing
Your contains method is breaking, because your compareTo method is always returning 0 or positive, no negatives. This means your compareTo is inconsistent. A correct implementation should return 0 if the authors are the same, or positive and negative values when the authors are different.
Example (assuming author1 is different than author2):
int i = author1.compareTo(author2); // i should be positive or negative
int j = author2.compareTo(author1); // j should be the opposite of i
Yours will return 1 for both of the above cases, which will make ordered Collections not work as no element is ever smaller. As another example imagine if you had a Binary Tree(an ordered collection) that had the elements [1-10]. If you were searching for the element 5, your binary tree when comparing 5 against any element would always say that it was equal or greater.
How exactly you should change it is up to you. But an idea would be to sort the authors by name, then iterate over both collections and compare the authors together lexicographically.
EDIT: Even after your edit to your methods they are still not consistent. Try the following, they aren't the most efficient but should work unless you really want to optimize for speed. Notice they first sort to make sure author1 and author2 are in order before they are compared with the other CoAutor which is also sorted. I don't do any null checking and assume both are valid authors.
#Override
public boolean equals(Object o){
if (o == null || !(o instanceof CoAutoria)) return false;
if (o == this) return true;
return this.compareTo((CoAutoria)o) == 0;
}
#Override
public int compareTo(CoAutoria o) {
List<String> authors1 = Arrays.asList(autor1.getNome(), autor2.getNome());
List<String> authors2 = Arrays.asList(o.autor1.getNome(), o.autor2.getNome());
Collections.sort(authors1);
Collections.sort(authors2);
for (int i=0;i<authors1.size();i++){
int compare = authors1.get(i).compareTo(authors2.get(i));
if (compare != 0)
return compare;
}
return 0;
}
I want to store values that are binded to a name + number.
Like, (John,1) (RED) and (John,2) (BLUE) and (Elize,1) (GREEN)
So how can i store a 2 keys that are combineded unique?
Create a new type which represents the composite key (the name and the number here). You'll need to override hashCode() and equals(), and I'd strongly advise you to make the type immutable. For example:
public final class NameIntPair {
private final int intValue;
private final String name;
public NameIntPair(int intValue, String name) {
this.intValue = intValue;
this.name = name;
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
int hash = 17;
hash = hash * 31 + intValue;
hash = hash * 31 + (name == null ? 0 : name.hashCode());
return hash;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (!(obj instanceof NameIntPair)) {
return false;
}
if (this == obj) {
return true;
}
NameIntPair other = (NameIntPair) obj;
return other.intValue == intValue && Objects.equal(other.name, name);
}
}
I'm using Objects.equal from Guava for convenience to avoid explicit nullity checks here - if you're not using Guava, you'd either have to use an equivalent or handle nullity in the code. Alternatively, you may well want to prevent null names, validating this in the constructor.
I'll use a String concatenation if I'm sure about the uniqueness of the combination and if the keys object are easy to stringify. I might use a special character to join the keys (like "John#1" and "John#2").
If I'm not sure about that I'll use Guava's Table:
Typically, when you are trying to index on more than one key at a
time, you will wind up with something like Map(FirstName,
Map(LastName, Person)), which is ugly and awkward to use. Guava
provides a new collection type, Table, which supports this use case
for any "row" type and "column" type
So a Table is
A collection that associates an ordered pair of keys, called a row key
and a column key, with a single value.
Define your specific Key class like this :
public class Key {
final String name;
final int number;
public Key(String name, int number) {
this.name = name;
this.number = number;
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
final int prime = 31;
int result = 1;
result = prime * result + getOuterType().hashCode();
result = prime * result
+ ((name == null) ? 0 : name.hashCode());
result = prime * result + number;
return result;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (this == obj)
return true;
if (obj == null)
return false;
if (getClass() != obj.getClass())
return false;
Key other = (Key) obj;
if (!getOuterType().equals(other.getOuterType()))
return false;
if (name == null) {
if (other.name != null)
return false;
} else if (!name.equals(other.name))
return false;
if (number != other.number)
return false;
return true;
}
private Test getOuterType() {
return Test.this;
}
}
The important point is to ensure that you respect the contract of equals and hashCode to enable your collection (any standard collection using key) to work as intended.
Here I simply used the generated methods produced by Eclipse but there are also many dynamic utilities (for example in Guava) helping you on this topic.
There is also simple alternative approach with concatenated key suitable for this case:
public static String getKey(String name, int number) {
return name + number;
}
If names are not too long, overhead for string concatenation won't be greater than for creating composite key objects suggested in other answers.