Line 1 : Set<Object> singletons = new HashSet<Object>();
Line 2 : singletons.add(new Integer(2));
Line 3 : Map<String, Object> myMap = new HashMap<String, String>();
Why compiler complains at line 3 and doesn't complains at line 2?
As mentioned in the comments, if you change your first line to
Set<Object> singletons = new HashSet<String>();
you'll get the same error. This is because HashSet<String> (and even Set<String>) is not a subtype of Set<Object>. To see why, think about the operations you'll call on that collection. You've already made one call to add an Integer object to it.
singletons.add(new Integer(2));
That works fine because you instantiated singletons to be HashSet<Object>. If you had instantiated it as a HashSet<String>, then you'd be adding an Integer object to a String collection, which is not allowed.
Try either
Map<String, String> myMap = new HashMap<String, String>();
or
Map<String, Object> myMap = new HashMap<String, Object>();
but I would use the diamond operator on the right, if you use java version >= 7
Map<String, String> myMap = new HashMap<>();
Related
Im storing 2 map with different structure in single map like below,
Map<String, List<String>> colMap = new HashMap<String, List<String>>();
Map<String, String> appMap = new HashMap<String, String>();
// colMap assigning some values
// appMap assigning some values
Map<String, Map> mainMap = new HashMap<String, Map>();
mainMap.put("appMap", appMap);
mainMap.put("colMap", colMap);
I want to get map one by one and iterate the map.
If I try get map like below, getting error,
.......
Map colMap = map.get("colMap");
for(Entry<String, List<String>> entry : colMap.entrySet())
Error: Type mismatch: cannot convert from element type Object to Map.Entry<String,List<String>>
Why not just create a simple container POJO class (or record in Java 16+) for the two maps instead of mainMap and keep the relevant type-safety which to do it Java-way?
public class MapPojo {
private final Map<String, List<String>> colMap;
private final Map<String, String> appMap;
public MapPojo(Map<String, List<String>> colMap, Map<String, String> appMap) {
this.colMap = colMap;
this.appMap = appMap;
}
// getters, etc.
}
MapPojo mainMap = new MapPojo(colMap, appMap);
Error you are getting because when you are doing map.get operation your reference is Just Map without any Generics which will treated as Object class's reference. You should use generics like below and it will work -
Map<String, List<String>> colMap = map.get("colMap");
for(Entry<String, List<String>> entry : colMap.entrySet())
Below is my code snippet
Map<Object, Object> gobalMap = new HashMap<Object, Object>();
Map<String, Map<String, Integer>> mp = new HashMap<String, Map<String, Integer>>();
gobalMap.put("mp",mp );
((Map<String, Map<String, Integer>>)gobalMap.get("mp")).put("A", new HashMap<String, Integer>().put("A", 1));
error:
The method put(String, Map<String,Integer>) in the type Map<String,Map<String,Integer>> is not applicable for the arguments (String, Integer)
May I know where am doing wrong ..?
new HashMap<String, Integer>().put("A", 1)
This returns an Integer. But you want to add this to an object which stores Maps and not Integer. So that's not possible. Also as Thomas explained in the comments, your code would not work even if it compiled because put returns the previous value of the map so you will receive a NullPointerException.
I would recommend restructuring your code to make it more readable and to also make it work:
Map<Object, Object> gobalMap = new HashMap<Object, Object>();
Map<String, Map<String, Integer>> mp = new HashMap<String, Map<String, Integer>>();
gobalMap.put("mp",mp );
HashMap<String, Integer> aMap = new HashMap<>();
aMap.put("A", 1);
((Map<String, Map<String, Integer>>)gobalMap.get("mp")).put("A", aMap);
As others have already stated new HashMap<String, Integer>().put("A", 1) returns an Integer (the previously mapped value for key "A" so null in this case) and that is not a suitable value for a Map<String, Map<String, Integer>>.
You're creating a suitable map but don't actually put it into the map so the reference to that map is lost.
Since you're probably trying to only create a nested map if it doesn't exist already try this:
((Map<String, Map<String, Integer>>)gobalMap.get("mp"))
.computeIfAbsent( "A", k -> new HashMap<String, Integer>())
.put("A", 1);
This does the following:
get and cast the map from globalMap (if you'd not be sure this can't return null you could use computeIfAbsent() here as well)
get the nested map for key "A" and if it doesn't exist create a new one, add and return it
put the value 1 for key "A" into the nested map
new HashMap<String, Integer>().put("A", 1) returns an integer, because when you put into a hashmap, you get back the previous value held by that key. As such it cannot be the value in a Map<String,Map<String,Integer>>.
Perhaps you meant to cast gobalMap to a Map<String,Map<String,Integer>>. But you are actually casting gobalMap.get("mp") to a Map<String, Map<String, Integer>>.
This, on the other hand, would compile:
((Map<String, Integer>) gobalMap.get("mp")).put("A", new HashMap<String, Integer>().put("A", 1));
though I'm not sure it does anything useful.
you missed the bracket. correct code will be:
((Map<String, Map<String, Integer>>)gobalMap.get("mp")).put("A", new HashMap<String, Integer>()).put("A", 1);
This works ok:
Map aMap;
aMap = new HashMap<String, TreeSet<String>>();
This does not compile:
Map<String, Set<String>> aMap;
aMap = new HashMap<String, TreeSet<String>>();
Error message:
Compilation failed (26/05/2014 11:45:43) Error: line 2 - incompatible types -
found java.util.HashMap<java.lang.String,java.util.TreeSet<java.lang.String>>
but expected java.util.Map<java.lang.String,java.util.Set<java.lang.String>>
Why?
The first one works because you use a raw type (without generic) so you can put any type of map in there.
The second one doesn't work because a XXX<Set> is not a XXX<TreeSet>.
So you need to choose between:
Map<String, Set<String>> aMap = new HashMap<String, Set<String>>();
//or
Map<String, TreeSet<String>> aMap = new HashMap<String, TreeSet<String>>();
And in both case you will be able to write:
aMap.put("abc", new TreeSet<>());
The main difference is when you get an item from the map, with the former construct you won't have access to the TreeSet specific methods.
Finally, with Java 7+ you can omit the generic information on the right hand side and the compiler will determine it automatically for you:
Map<String, Set<String>> aMap = new HashMap<>();
Map<String, TreeSet<String>> aMap = new HashMap<>();
Use this instead:
Map<String, ? extends Set<String>> aMap;
aMap = new HashMap<String, TreeSet<String>>();
Because the Set's generic must not be the same than TreeSet's generic.
+1 to Peter's answer, TreeSet implements SortedSet which extends Set.
Map<String, ? extends Set<String>> aMap;
aMap = new HashMap<String, TreeSet<String>>();
will work fine.
I would like to instantiate Map<String, List<String>> in Java,
I tried
Map<String, List<String>> foo = new <String, List<String>>();
and
Map<String, List<String>> foo = new <String, ArrayList<String>>();
None of them work. Does any one know how to instantiate this map in Java?
new HashMap<String, List<String>>();
or as gparyani commented:
new HashMap<>(); // type inference
Note: each entry needs to be given an instantiated List as a value. You cannot get("myKey").add("some_string_for_this_key"); the very first time you get() a List from it.
So, fetch a List, check if it's null.
If it's null, make a new list, add the string to it, put the List back.
If it's anything but null, add to it, or do what you want.
You forgot to mention the class. Map here is the reference type and is an Interface. HashMap on the other side of equals specifies the actual type of the Object created and assigned to the reference foo.
Map<String, List<String>> foo = new HashMap<String, List<String>>();
The actual type specified (HashMap here) must be assignable to the reference type (Map here) i.e. if the type of reference is an Interface, the Object's type must implement it. And, if the type of the reference is a Class, the Object's type must either be the same class or its subtype i.e. it extends from it.
From Java 7 onwards, you can use a shorthand like
Map<String, List<String>> foo = new HashMap<>();
Your second way of instantiation is not recommended. Stick to using List which is an Interface.
// Don't bind your Map to ArrayList
new TreeMap<String, ArrayList<String>>();
// Use List interface type instead
new TreeMap<String, List<String>>();
Map is an interface. You have to tell Java which concrete Map class you want to instantiate.
Map<String, List<String>> foo = new HashMap<String, List<String>>();
or
Map<String, List<String>> foo = new TreeMap<String, List<String>>();
etc.
This question already has answers here:
How can I combine two HashMap objects containing the same types?
(17 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
I have two HashMaps defined like so:
HashMap<String, List<Incident>> map1 = new HashMap<String, List<Incident>>();
HashMap<String, List<Incident>> map2 = new HashMap<String, List<Incident>>();
Also, I have a 3rd HashMap Object:
HashMap<String, List<Incident>> map3;
and the merge list when combine both.
In short, you can't. map3 doesn't have the correct types to merge map1 and map2 into it.
However if it was also a HashMap<String, List<Incident>>. You could use the putAll method.
map3 = new HashMap<String, List<Incident>>();
map3.putAll(map1);
map3.putAll(map2);
If you wanted to merge the lists inside the HashMap. You could instead do this.
map3 = new HashMap<String, List<Incident>>();
map3.putAll(map1);
for(String key : map2.keySet()) {
List<Incident> list2 = map2.get(key);
List<Incident> list3 = map3.get(key);
if(list3 != null) {
list3.addAll(list2);
} else {
map3.put(key,list2);
}
}
create third map and use putAll() method to add data from ma
HashMap<String, Integer> map1 = new HashMap<String, Integer>();
HashMap<String, Integer> map2 = new HashMap<String, Integer>();
HashMap<String, Integer> map3 = new HashMap<String, Integer>();
map3.putAll(map1);
map3.putAll(map2);
You have different type in question for map3 if that is not by mistake then you need to iterate through both map using EntrySet
Use commons collections:
Map<String, List<Incident>> combined = CollectionUtils.union(map1, map2);
If you want an Integer map, I suppose you could apply the .hashCode method to all values in your Map.
HashMap has a putAll method.
Refer this :
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/HashMap.html