Develop Reference

Extract list of String from RealmResult [duplicate]

I have the ViewValue class defined as follows:
class ViewValue {
private Long id;
private Integer value;
private String description;
private View view;
private Double defaultFeeRate;
// getters and setters for all properties
}
Somewhere in my code i need to convert a list of ViewValue instances to a list containing values of id fields from corresponding ViewValue.
I do it using foreach loop:
List<Long> toIdsList(List<ViewValue> viewValues) {
List<Long> ids = new ArrayList<Long>();
for (ViewValue viewValue : viewValues) {
ids.add(viewValue.getId());
}
return ids;
}
Is there a better approach to this problem?

We can do it in a single line of code using java 8
List<Long> ids = viewValues.stream().map(ViewValue::getId).collect(Collectors.toList());
For more info : Java 8 - Streams

You could do it in a one-liner using Commons BeanUtils and Collections:
(why write your own code when others have done it for you?)
import org.apache.commons.beanutils.BeanToPropertyValueTransformer;
import org.apache.commons.collections.CollectionUtils;
...
List<Long> ids = (List<Long>) CollectionUtils.collect(viewValues,
new BeanToPropertyValueTransformer("id"));

Use google collections. Example:
Function<ViewValue, Long> transform = new Function<ViewValue, Long>() {
#Override
public Long apply(ViewValue from) {
return from.getId();
}
};
List<ViewValue> list = Lists.newArrayList();
List<Long> idsList = Lists.transform(list, transform);
UPDATE:
On Java 8 you don't need Guava. You can:
import com.example.ViewValue;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.function.Function;
import java.util.stream.Collectors;
Function<ViewValue, Long> transform = ViewValue::getId;
List<ViewValue> source = new ArrayList<>();
List<Long> result = source.stream().map(transform).collect(Collectors.toList());
Or just:
List<ViewValue> source= new ArrayList<>();
List<Long> result = source.stream().map(ViewValue::getId).collect(Collectors.toList());
NEXT UPDATE (The last one after Javaslang to Vavr name change):
Currently it's worth to mention about the solution with Javaslang library(http://www.javaslang.io/) Vavr library (http://www.vavr.io/). Let's assume that we have our list with genuine objects:
List<ViewValue> source = newArrayList(new ViewValue(1), new ViewValue(2), new ViewValue(2));
We could make transformation with List class from Javaslang library (on the long run the collect is not convenient):
List<Long> result = io.vavr.collection.List.ofAll(source).map(ViewValue::getId).toJavaList();
But you will see the power with only the Javaslang lists:
io.vavr.collection.List<ViewValue> source = javaslang.collection.List.of(new ViewValue(1), new ViewValue(2), new ViewValue(3));
io.vavr.collection.List<Long> res = source.map(ViewValue::getId);
I encourage to take a look available collections and new types on that library (I like especially the Try type). You will find the documentation under the following address: http://www.javaslang.io/javaslang-docs/ http://www.vavr.io/vavr-docs/.
PS. Due to the Oracle and the "Java" word within the name they had to change the library name from javaslang to something else. They had decided to Vavr.

EDIT: This answer is based on the idea that you'll need to do similar things for different entities and different properties elsewhere in your code. If you only need to convert the list of ViewValues to a list of Longs by ID, then stick with your original code. If you want a more reusable solution, however, read on...
I would declare an interface for the projection, e.g.
public interface Function<Arg,Result>
{
public Result apply(Arg arg);
}
Then you can write a single generic conversion method:
public <Source, Result> List<Result> convertAll(List<Source> source,
Function<Source, Result> projection)
{
ArrayList<Result> results = new ArrayList<Result>();
for (Source element : source)
{
results.add(projection.apply(element));
}
return results;
}
Then you can define simple projections like this:
private static final Function<ViewValue, Long> ID_PROJECTION =
new Function<ViewValue, Long>()
{
public Long apply(ViewValue x)
{
return x.getId();
}
};
And apply it just like this:
List<Long> ids = convertAll(values, ID_PROJECTION);
(Obviously using K&R bracing and longer lines makes the projection declaration a bit shorter :)
Frankly all of this would be a lot nicer with lambda expressions, but never mind...

I've implemented a small functional library for this usecase. One of the methods has this signature:
<T> List<T> mapToProperty(List<?> objectList, String property, Class<T> returnType)
Which takes the string and uses reflection to create a call to the property then it returns a List backed by the objectList where get and iterator implemented using this property call.
The mapToProperty functions is implemented in terms of a general map function that takes a Function as a mapper though, just as another post described. Very usefull.
I suggest you read up on basic functionl programming and in particular take a look at Functors (objects implementing a map function)
Edit: Reflection really doesn't have to be expensive. The JVM has improved a lot in this area. Just make sure to compile the invocation once and reuse it.
Edit2: Sample code
public class MapExample {
public static interface Function<A,R>
{
public R apply(A b);
}
public static <A,R> Function<A,R> compilePropertyMapper(Class<A> objectType, String property, Class<R> propertyType)
{
try {
final Method m = objectType.getMethod("get" + property.substring(0,1).toUpperCase() + property.substring(1));
if(!propertyType.isAssignableFrom(m.getReturnType()))
throw new IllegalArgumentException(
"Property "+property+" on class "+objectType.getSimpleName()+" is not a "+propertyType.getSimpleName()
);
return new Function<A,R>()
{
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
public R apply(A b)
{
try {
return (R)m.invoke(b);
} catch (Exception e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
};
};
} catch (Exception e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}
public static <T1,T2> List<T2> map(final List<T1> list, final Function<T1,T2> mapper)
{
return new AbstractList<T2>()
{
#Override
public T2 get(int index) {
return mapper.apply(list.get(index));
}
#Override
public int size() {
return list.size();
}
};
}
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
public static <T1,T2> List<T2> mapToProperty(List<T1> list, String property, Class<T2> propertyType)
{
if(list == null)
return null;
else if(list.isEmpty())
return Collections.emptyList();
return map(list,compilePropertyMapper((Class<T1>)list.get(0).getClass(), property, propertyType));
}
}

You could use a wrapper:
public class IdList impements List<Long>
{
private List<ViewValue> underlying;
pubic IdList(List<ViewValue> underying)
{
this.underlying = underying;
}
public Long get(int index)
{
return underlying.get(index).getId()
}
// other List methods
}
Though that's even more tedious work, it could improve performance.
You could also implement your and my solution generic-ly using reflection, but that would be very bad for performance.
There's no short and easy generic solution in Java, I'm afraid. In Groovy, you would simply use collect(), but I believe that involves reflection as well.

That depends on what you then do with the List<Long>, and the List<ViewValue>
For example you might get sufficient functionality from creating your own List implementation that wraps a List<ViewValue>, implementing iterator() with an iterator implementation that iterates over the ViewValues, returning the id.

You can populate a map from the properties of a list of objects (say id as key and some property as value) as below
Map<String, Integer> mapCount = list.stream().collect(Collectors.toMap(Object::get_id, Object::proprty));

Unit Test a private field which is behavior relevant

first of all: I found few solutions for my problem but the "newest" one was from 2014 and used reflections so I hope I could maybe find some more advanced solutions for my question.
Thats the case and its about migrateUser and canAdd. This is an example class to make my question easily visible.
public class UserInterfaceImpl implements UserInterface {
private final List<T> accountList = new LinkedList<>();
private final AccountInterface accountInterface;
private boolean bonusReceived = false;
public UserInterfaceImpl(AccountInterface accountInterface) {
this.accountInterface = accountInterface;
}
public void migrateUser(AccountMergerInterface accountMerger, UserInterface oldUser) {
boolean success = accountMerger.performChange(this, oldUser);
if (success && !bonusReceived) {
//addBonus
accountInterface.deposit(1);
bonusReceived = false;
}
}
public boolean canAdd() {
return accountList > 0;
}
public AccountInterface getAccount() {
return accountInterface;
}
}
The migrateUser method changes the some account Data which is not relevant for my test because I would test it separately of course (should be like that what I read so far).
So I wonder, how can I see if the behavior of that class changes the bonusReceived correctly? Without using reflections and do it as sophisticated as possible?
My first attempt was that:
#Test
public void testMigrateUser() {
AccountMergerInterface test = mock(AccountMergerInterface.class);
// define return value for method getUniqueId()
when(test.performChange()).thenReturn(true);
}
But now I cannot continue. The rule should be in my example to have no getter and setter! The class should be like my example.
I don't know how to:
set bonusReceived to false before migrateUser is executed that accountInterface.deposit(1); is not executed
see if bonusReceived will be set to false if the if() continue is true.
Same questions for the List: how can I access the private field of List, add an Object so that the return value is true or false. Or should I "simulate" a List and if yes, how can I do that?
Thanks in advance!

Unit tests check public observable behavior.
There is no point in verifying internal state of an object since this may change to support other behavior. You don't want to change your unit test in that case...
So mock the AccountMergerInterface (as you already did) and the AccountInterface and verify that your class under test calls the methods on them in the right order with the right parameters:
#Rule
public MockitoRule mockitoRule = MockitoJUnit.rule();
#Mock
private AccountMergerInterface accountMergerInterface;
#Mock
private AccountInterface accountInterface;
#Test
public void testMigrateUser() {
// arrange
when(test.performChange()).thenReturn(true);
// act
new UserInterfaceImpl(accountInterface).migrateUser(accountMergerInterface);
// assert
InOrder inOrder Mockito.inOrder(accountMergerInterface, accountInterface);
inOrder.verify(accountMergerInterface).deposit(1);
inOrder.verify(accountInterface).whatEverToCallNext();
}
Same questions for the List:
There is currently no code dealing with the list in UserInterfaceImpl.
You cannot verify behavior which is not there...

How to log List interface method for existing code

I have existing codebase that sometimes uses ArrayList or LinkedList and I need to find a way to log whenever add or remove is called to track what has been either added or removed.
What is the best way to make sure I have logging in place?
So for example.
ArrayList<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>();
list.add(123);
and
LinkedList<Integer> anotherNewList = new LinkedList<Integer>();
anotherNewList.add(333);
Not sure if I can intercept add method to achieve this or create overriding class that implements java.util.List interface then use it instead. Either way I'm looking for a good solution that requires minimum intervention and prefrerrably without using any third party packages...

I would use the so called Decorator Pattern to wrap your lists.
This would be a simple example code just to give you an idea:
private static class LogDecorator<T> implements Collection<T> {
private final Collection<T> delegate;
private LogDecorator(Collection<T> delegate) {this.delegate = delegate;}
#Override
public int size() {
return delegate.size();
}
#Override
public boolean isEmpty() {
return delegate.isEmpty();
}
#Override
public boolean contains(Object o) {
return delegate.contains(o);
}
#Override
public Iterator<T> iterator() {
return delegate.iterator();
}
#Override
public Object[] toArray() {
return delegate.toArray();
}
#Override
public <T1> T1[] toArray(T1[] a) {
return delegate.toArray(a);
}
#Override
public boolean add(T t) {
// ADD YOUR INTERCEPTING CODE HERE
return delegate.add(t);
}
#Override
public boolean remove(Object o) {
return delegate.remove(o);
}
#Override
public boolean containsAll(Collection<?> c) {
return delegate.containsAll(c);
}
#Override
public boolean addAll(Collection<? extends T> c) {
return delegate.addAll(c);
}
#Override
public boolean removeAll(Collection<?> c) {
return delegate.removeAll(c);
}
#Override
public boolean retainAll(Collection<?> c) {
return delegate.retainAll(c);
}
#Override
public void clear() {
delegate.clear();
}
}

There is not really a simple way to get there.
Those classes are part of the "standard libraries"; so you can't change their behavior. You could create your own versions of them; and use class path ordering to get them used; but this really dirty hack.
The only other option: extend those classes; #Override the methods you want to be logged; and make sure all your sources use your own versions of those classes. Or if you prefer composition over inheritance you go for the decorator pattern; as suggested by JDC's answer.
The "third" option is really different - you turn to aspect oriented programming (for example using AspectJ) and use such tools to manipulate things on a bytecode level. But that adds a whole new layer of "complexity" to your product; thus I am not counting it as real option.
EDIT on your answer: it seems that you don't understand the difference between interface and implementation?! An interface simply describes a set of method signatures; but in order to have real code behind those methods, there needs to be an implementing class. You see, when you do
List<X> things = new ArrayList<>();
the real type of things is ArrayList; but you rarely care about that real type; it is good enough to know that you can all those List methods on things. So, when you create some new implementation of the List interface ... that doesn't affect any existing
... = new ArrayList ...
declarations at all. You would have to change all assignments to
List<X> things = new YourNewListImplementation<>();

JDC has given a good way to follow.
I would like bring important precisions.
The decorator pattern allows to create a class which decorates another class by adding or removing dynamically a new responsibility to an instance.
In your case, you want to add responsibility.
Decorator is not an intrusive pattern but the decorator class have to conform to the class that it decorates.
So in your case, having a decorator which derives from the Collection interface is not conform to the decorated object since List has methods that Collection has not.
Your need is decorating List instances, so decorator should derive from the List type.
Besides, the decorator class can do, according its needs, a processing before and or after the operation of the class that it decorates but it is also responsible to call the original operation of the decorated class.
In your case, you want to know if an element was added or in or removed from the List. To achieve it, as the method result has consequences on whether you log or not the information, it is preferable to delegate first the processing to the decorated object and then your decorator can perform its processings.
Sometimes, you don't need to decorate a method, don't do it but don't forget to delegate suitably to the decorated object.
import java.util.Iterator;
import java.util.List;
public class DecoratorList<T> implements List<T> {
private static final Tracer tracer = ....;
private List<T> decorated;
private DecoratorList(List<T> decorated) {
this.decorated=decorated;
}
// no decorated methods
....
#Override
public int size() {
return this.decorated.size();
}
#Override
public boolean isEmpty() {
return this.decorated.isEmpty();
}
#Override
public boolean contains(Object o) {
return this.decorated.contains(o);
}
#Override
public Iterator<T> iterator() {
return this.decorated.iterator();
}
....
// end no decorated methods
// exemple of decorated methods
#Override
public void add(int index, T element) {
tracer.info("element " + element + " added to index " + index);
this.decorated.add(index,element);
}
#Override
public boolean remove(Object o) {
final boolean isRemoved = this.decorated.remove(o);
if (isRemoved){
tracer.info("element " + o + " removed");
}
return isRemoved;
}
}
As explained, a decorator is not intrusive for the decorated objects.
So the idea is not changing your code that works but add the decorating operation just after the list be instantiated.
If don't program by interface when you declare your list variables, that is you declare ArrayList list = new ArrayList() instead of List list = new ArrayList() , of course you should change the declared type to List but it doesn't break the code, on the contrary.
Here is your example code :
ArrayList<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>();
list.add(123);
LinkedList<Integer> anotherNewList = new LinkedList<Integer>();
anotherNewList.add(333);
Now, you could do it :
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>();
list = new DecoratorList<Integer>(list); // line added
list.add(123);
List<Integer> anotherNewList = new LinkedList<Integer>();
anotherNewList = new DecoratorList<Integer>(anotherNewList); // line added
anotherNewList.add(333);
To ease the task and make it safer, you could even create a util method to apply the decoration on the list :
private static <T> List<T> decorateList(List<T> list) {
list = new DecoratorList<T>(list);
return list;
}
and call it like that :
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>();
list = decorateList(list); // line added
list.add(123);

You can use Aspects - but it will log every add and remove call:
#Aspect
public class ListLoggerAspect {
#Around("execution(* java.util.List.add(..))")
public boolean aroundAdd(ProceedingJoinPoint joinPoint) throws Throwable {
boolean result = (boolean) joinPoint.proceed(joinPoint.getArgs());
// do the logging
return result;
}
}
You'll need to configure the aspect in META-INF/aop.xml :
<aspectj>
<aspects>
<aspect name="com.example.ListLoggerAspect"/>
</aspects>
</aspectj>

An easy way to accomplish this is wrapping your source list in a ObservableList and use that as base list. You can simply add an listener to this list to catch every modification (and log out if you wish)
Example:
List obs = FXCollections.observableList(myOriginalList);
obs.addListener(c -> {
for(Item it : c.getRemoved())
System.out.println(it);
for(Item it : c.getAddedSubList())
System.out.println(it);
});
See the javafx documentation on how to add a good listener

Your List is the source here. You need to keep track of the changes to the source. This is a good and natural example of the Observer pattern. You can create an Observable which is your list. Then create some Observers and register them to the Observable. When the Observable is changed, notify all the registered Observers. Inside the Observer you can log the changes using the input event. You should literally implement some ObservableCollection here. You can use Java Rx to get this work done. Please find the sample code given below.
package com.test;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.List;
import rx.Observable;
import rx.subjects.PublishSubject;
public class ObservableListDemo {
public static class ObservableList<T> {
protected final List<T> list;
protected final PublishSubject<T> onAdd;
public ObservableList() {
this.list = new ArrayList<T>();
this.onAdd = PublishSubject.create();
}
public void add(T value) {
list.add(value);
onAdd.onNext(value);
}
public Observable<T> getObservable() {
return onAdd;
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
ObservableList<Integer> observableList = new ObservableList<>();
observableList.getObservable().subscribe(System.out::println);
observableList.add(1);
Thread.sleep(1000);
observableList.add(2);
Thread.sleep(1000);
observableList.add(3);
}
}
Hope this helps. Happy coding !

We need a little more information to find the right solution. But I see a number of options.
You can track changes, using a decorator.
You can copy the collection and calculate the changes
You can use aspects to 'decorate' every List in the JVM
Change the existing codebase (a little bit)
1) works if you know exactly how the list is used, and once it is returned to your new code, you are the only user. So the existing code can't have any methods that add to the original list (because would invoke add/remove on the delegate instead of the decorated collection).
2) This approach is used when multiple classes can modify the list. You need to be able to get a copy of the list, before any modifications begin, and then calculate what happened afterwards. If you have access to Apache Collections library you can use CollectionUtils to calculate the intersection and disjunction.
3) This solution requires some for of weaving (compile or load time) as this will create a proxy for every List, so it can add callback code around the method calls. I would not recommend this option unless you have a good understanding of how aspects work, as this solution has a rather steep learning curve, and if something goes wrong and you need to debug you code, it can be a bit tricky.
4) You say existing codebase, which leads me to believe, that you could actually change the code if you really wanted. If this is at all possible, that is the approach I would choose. If the user of the List needs to be able to track changes, then the best possible solution is that the library returns a ChangeTrackingList (interface defining methods from tracking), which you could build using decoration.
One thing you have to be aware of when decorating, is that List has a removeAll() and a addAll(), these methods may or may not call the add() and remove(), this depends on the list implementation. If you are not aware of how these methods are invoked internally you could end up seeing an object as removed twice (unless you can use a set).

Unit testing Collection in Java

I have a unit test that will allow me to iterate through a Collection object containing a list of vehicle. Upon each iteration, I want to check to see if the vehicle is an instance of automobile. So my code looks a bit like this:
public class VehicleChecker {
protected boolean checkVehicles(Garage garage) {
for (Vehicle vehicle : garage.getVehicles() {
if (vehicle instanceof Automobile) return true;
}
}
}
So I wrote my code accordingly:
#Mock private Garage mockGarage;
#Mock private VehicleCollection mockVehicleCollection;
#Mock private VehicleCollectionIterator mockVehicleCollectionIterator;
#Mock private Vehicle mockVehicle;
#Test
public void testCheckVehicles() {
VehicleChecker testObject = new vehicleChecker();
when(mockGarage.getVehicles()).thenReturn(mockVehicleCollection);
when(mockVehicleCollection.iterator()).thenReturn(mockVehicleCollectionIterator);
when(mockVehicleCollectionIterator.hasNext()).thenReturn(true).thenReturn(false);
when(mockVehicleCollectionIterator.next()).thenReturn(mockVehicle);
boolean result = testObject.checkVehicles(mockGarage);
verify(mockGarage).getVehicles();
}
The problem occurs with the verify statement. Based on how it was written, the test should pass. When I step through the code, however, I the code just skips the for loop entirely. Why is that? Is there a difference in the way one iterates through a Collection as opposed to an ArrayList? If so, how do I properly mock that interaction?

Are you sure you have initialized mocks with MockitoAnnotations.initMocks?

Implementing Data Acess API using dependency Injection

I am new to writing API's and did some research and realize to accomplish what I want I would need to do it using Dependency Injection. I am writing an android application that haves two data source. One is expose by web services and the other is SQLlite. The SQLlite is used as backup when no data connection is available (Only interested for the webservice portion of the API for the time being will refactor). I want to write a API that provides a layer of abstraction to this that calls the right data access class based on the model required. Therefore, I have a interface that describes methods that the api should implement, called IDataAccess (Only interested in getAll for the purpose of figuring out what to do).
public interface IDataAccess {
public <T> List <T> getAll ();
public <T> T getById (int id);
}//end IDataAccess
I am using Guice for dependency injection. The guice module is:
public class Data extends AbstractModule {
public void configure () {
bind (IDataAccess.class).to(UserData.class);
}
}
and a Implementation of IDataAccess is (Note I am using Jersey Client API):
public class UserData extends DataAccessManager implements IDataAccess {
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
public List <User> getAll () {
WebResource webResource = client.resource (WebResourceURL.URL_USER_ALL);
ClientResponse response = webResource.accept(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON).get(ClientResponse.class);
if (response.getStatus () == 200)
return response.getEntity(new GenericType <List <User>> () {}) ;
else
return null;
}//end getAllUsers method
}
I have a class that loads and instantiates any resource needed. It also returns a instance of a DataManager called DataAccessFactory.
public class DataAccessFactory {
private Client client;
private static DataAccessFactory instance;
private DataAccessFactory() {
client = Client.create();
}
public static DataAccessFactory getInstance() {
/*
* check if instance variable is instantiated.
* if it is not then instantiated it and returns
* created instance.
*/
if (instance == null) {
instance = new DataAccessFactory();
return instance;
} else
return instance;
}//end getInstance method
public DataAccessManager createDataAccessManager() {
return new DataAccessManager(client);
}//end createDataAccessManager method
}
Then I have the actual DataAccessManager class:
public class DataAccessManager {
protected Client client;
protected DataAccessManager (Client client)n{
this.client = client;
}//end constructor
public <T> List <Object> getAll(T t) {
Data module = new Data ();
Injector injector = Guice.createInjector(module);
IDataAccess data = (IDataAccess) injector.getInstance(t.getClass());
return (List<Object>) data;
}//end fetchAllUser method
}
To call the user model on this class I would do something like this:
#Test
public void fetchUser () {
DataAccessManager m = DataAccessFactory.getInstance().createDataAccessManager();
List<User> user = (List<User>) m.getAll(new Userdata ());
if (user == null)
assertEquals(1, 2);
else
assertEquals(1, 1);
}
Ideally what I want this to do now is, call the UserData to get all the User objects or the OrderData (When implementation is written) class to get all the order objects etc.
The problem is that this is giving a error:
Cannot cast from List to List
.How can I fix this problem or restructure this so that it makes sense?

1) You are creating an injector (Guice.createInjector) per request. Injector creation is expensive and should normally be done during application loading. You should see DI as a bootstrap mechanism and keep it simple.
2) You don't need the DataAccessFactory. First there is no need for a factory as the createDataAccessManager instantiation does not require any logic and secondly Guice could also take care of the factory pattern.
I would personally keep it simple and inject with Guice directly the UserData instance into each service that needs it, without using the rather complicated Abstraction approach showed here. Still, it does not solve the problem of dealing with network issues. My guess is that each data access class will have to deal with connectivity in a specific way, so the logic should be directly here.
For the list casting problem, see http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/generics/subtyping.html
If you will continue that way, I would recommend to read about erasure also.

It's a common problem you fall for. We'd expect that as String is-a Object, List<String> is-a List<Object> is true too. But it isn't. This is why this class cast won't work:
#Test
public void fetchUser () {
//...
List<User> user = (List<User>) m.getAll(new Userdata ());
//..
}
I suggest to rewrite the DataAccessManager.getAll() method to return the right kind of list.
For the record, I found a typo in DataAccessManager.getAll() method. I think when you wrote return (List<Object>) data; then you rather wanted to write return List<Object> data.getAll(); Otherwise you just cannot cast IDataAccess to List.
To escape from this casting hell I suggest to add a type to the IDataAccess interface and to its implementations:
public interface IDataAccess<T> {
public List <T> getAll ();
public T getById (int id);
}//end IDataAccess
public class UserData extends DataAccessManager<User> implements IDataAccess<User> {
// your implementation
}
I'd also clarify DataAccesManager itself:
public class DataAccessManager<T> {
//fields and constructors
public List<T> getAll(IDataAccess<T> access) { //this is how the test suggests you want to use this method
Data module = new Data ();
Injector injector = Guice.createInjector(module);
IDataAccess<T> data = (IDataAccess<T>) injector.getInstance(access.getClass()); //why is this line important? why don't you use the access parameter instead?
return data.getAll();
}
}