I want to implement a util getting an Enum object by its string value. Here is my implementation.
IStringEnum.java
public interface IStringEnum {
String getValue();
}
StringEnumUtil.java
public class StringEnumUtil {
private volatile static Map<String, Map<String, Enum>> stringEnumMap = new HashMap<>();
private StringEnumUtil() {}
public static <T extends Enum<T>> Enum fromString(Class<T> enumClass, String symbol) {
final String enumClassName = enumClass.getName();
if (!stringEnumMap.containsKey(enumClassName)) {
synchronized (enumClass) {
if (!stringEnumMap.containsKey(enumClassName)) {
System.out.println("aaa:" + stringEnumMap.get(enumClassName));
Map<String, Enum> innerMap = new HashMap<>();
EnumSet<T> set = EnumSet.allOf(enumClass);
for (Enum e: set) {
if (e instanceof IStringEnum) {
innerMap.put(((IStringEnum) e).getValue(), e);
}
}
stringEnumMap.put(enumClassName, innerMap);
}
}
}
return stringEnumMap.get(enumClassName).get(symbol);
}
}
I wrote a unit test in order to test whether it works in multi-thread case.
StringEnumUtilTest.java
public class StringEnumUtilTest {
enum TestEnum implements IStringEnum {
ONE("one");
TestEnum(String value) {
this.value = value;
}
#Override
public String getValue() {
return this.value;
}
private String value;
}
#Test
public void testFromStringMultiThreadShouldOk() {
final int numThread = 100;
CountDownLatch startLatch = new CountDownLatch(1);
CountDownLatch doneLatch = new CountDownLatch(numThread);
List<Boolean> resultList = new LinkedList<>();
for (int i = 0; i < numThread; ++i) {
new Thread(() -> {
try {
startLatch.await();
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
resultList.add(StringEnumUtil.fromString(TestEnum.class, "one") != null);
doneLatch.countDown();
}).start();
}
startLatch.countDown();
try {
doneLatch.await();
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
assertEquals(numThread, resultList.stream().filter(item -> item.booleanValue()).count());
}
}
The testing result is:
aaa:null
java.lang.AssertionError:
Expected :100
Actual :98
It denotes that only one thread execute this line of code:
System.out.println("aaa:" + stringEnumMap.get(enumClassName));
So the initialization codes should be executed by only one thread.
The strange thing is, the result of some thread will be null after executing this line of code:
return stringEnumMap.get(enumClassName).get(symbol);
Since there is no NullPointerException, stringEnumMap.get(enumClassName) must return the reference of innerMap. But why it will get null after calling get(symbol) of innerMap?
Please help, it drive me crazy the whole day!
The problem is due to the line
List<Boolean> resultList = new LinkedList<>();
From JavaDoc of LinkedList:
Note that this implementation is not synchronized.If multiple threads access a linked list concurrently, and at least one of the threads modifies the list structurally, it must be synchronized externally. (A structural modification is any operation that adds or deletes one or more elements; merely setting the value of an element is not a structural modification.) This is typically accomplished by synchronizing on some object that naturally encapsulates the list.If no such object exists, the list should be "wrapped" using the Collections.synchronizedListmethod. This is best done at creation time, to prevent accidental unsynchronized access to the list:
List list = Collections.synchronizedList(new LinkedList(...));
As LinkedList is not thread safe, and unexpected behavior may happens during the add operation.
Which cause the resultList size less than the thread count, and hence the expected count is less than the result count.
To get correct result, add Collections.synchronizedList as suggested.
Although you implementation is fine, I suggest you to follow Matt Timmermans answer for simpler and robust solution.
stringEnumMap should be a ConcurrentHashMap<String, Map<String,Enum>>, and use computeIfAbsent to do the lazy initialization.
ConcurrentMap interface
As others noted, if manipulating a Map across threads you must account for concurrency.
You could handle concurrent access yourself. But there is no need. Java comes with two implementations of Map that are built to internally handle concurrency. These implementations implement the ConcurrentMap interface.
ConcurrentSkipListMap
ConcurrentHashMap
The first maintains the keys in sorted order, implementing the NavigableMap interface.
Here is a table I authored to show the characteristics of all the implementations of Map bundled with Java 11.
You might find other third-party implementations of the ConcurrentMap interface.
try moving
if (!stringEnumMap.containsKey(enumClassName))
and the
return stringEnumMap.get(enumClassName).get(symbol);
into the synchronized block.
I Used Java HashSet for storing unique elements but now I want to retrieve element but HashSet does not has something like that, Here is what I want for my problem:
for my usecase LinkInfo hashCode() and equals() methods do not use LinkInfo.id field I want to get linkinfo instance from set and update all of its' fields except id field that should be from old instance
Set<LinkInfo> fooSet = new HashSet<>()
public void updateFoo(LinkInfo linkInfo) {
LinkInfo temp = fooSet.get(linkInfo);
linkInfo.setId(temp.getId());
// now update set
fooSet.remove(linkInfo)
fooSet.add(linkInfo)
}
Rather than
LinkInfo temp = fooSet.get(linkInfo);
the below logic is the same as what you seem to want
if (fooSet.contains(linkInfo)) {
temp = linkInfo;
}
I don't know why you're doing this, but to answer the question, yes you can do this, but you should use a map, like so:
import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.Map;
public class Main {
static class Test {
public int a,b;
public Test(int a, int b) {
this.a = a;
this.b = b;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
Test that = (Test)obj;
return this.a == that.a && this.b == that.b;
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
return a ^ b;
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Map<Test,Test> map = new HashMap<>();
Test t = new Test(1,2);
System.out.println(System.identityHashCode(t));
map.put(t, t);
Test t2 = new Test(1,2);
System.out.println(System.identityHashCode(t2));
System.out.println(System.identityHashCode(map.get(t2)));
}
}
Now you are able to retrieve the instance that you put into that map initially through an instance that is equal to it.
The program printed:
475266352
1355531311
475266352
on my computer. You can use a HashSet and iterate through it achieving the same result, but it won't be O(1).
You have a bit of a logical problem here. Why should an API that depends on equals() provide a method getElementEqualTo(e)? In order to use such a method, you need to present an object that, for the API's purposes, is equivalent to the desired result. What would be the point of that?
But that doesn't mean you're out of luck. I think you're saying that your LinkInfo class provides hashCode() and equals() methods suitable for identifying the object you want by means of a different object that you can obtain. In that case, it sounds like a HashMap could serve your purpose. Just map each key to itself.
HashMap<LinkInfo, LinkInfo> infos;
public void updateInfo(LinkInfo linkInfo) {
LinkInfo temp = infos.remove(linkInfo);
if (temp != null) {
linkInfo.setId(temp.getId());
}
infos.put(linkInfo, linkInfo);
}
I do agree with Scary answer above, but in case you want the exact reference that is stored in the Set instead of an similar equal object, you may use below code:
public void updateFoo(LinkInfo linkInfo) {
LinkInfo temp = null;
for(LinkInfo curLinkInfo:fooSet) if (curLinkInfo.equals(linkInfo))temp = curLinkInfo;
if(temp!=null)
linkInfo.setId(temp.getId());
// now update set
fooSet.remove(linkInfo)
fooSet.add(linkInfo)
}
I'm new to this site, so please feel free to correct me if there's anything wrong about my question or the style of the question.
I need to implement the Iterable Interface in my ShareCollection class, so that I can iterate over all the shares in this class. When I'm testing my class with the sample data it always hands back '0' as size, even though there are (in my example) two shares in my collection.
Here's the code of the class + one sample method which hands back an error:
public class ShareCollection implements Iterable<Share>{
private HashSet<Share> shares;
public ShareCollection() {
this.shares = new HashSet<Share>();
}
public ShareCollection(Collection<Share> shares) {
for (Share s : shares) {
HashSet<Share> checkSet = new HashSet<Share>(shares);
checkSet.remove(s);
if (checkSet.contains(s)) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("There can't be two shares with the same name!");
}
}
this.shares = new HashSet<Share>(shares);
}
public boolean add(Share share) {
if (share == null) {
throw new NullPointerException("share isnt allowed to be null!");
}
return shares.add(share);
}
#Override
public Iterator<Share> iterator() {
return new HashSet<Share>(shares).iterator();
}
}
Here's the main method with the sample data I'm using:
public static void main(String[] args) {
Share s1 = new Share("s1", new ArrayList<>());
Share s2 = new Share("s2", new ArrayList<>());
ShareCollection sc = new ShareCollection()
sc.add(s1);
sc.add(s2);
int counter = 0;
for (Share s : sc) {
counter++;
}
System.out.print("Counter: " + counter + "\n");
System.out.print("Size: " + sc.size());
}
Here's the output for the main-method:
Counter: 2
Size: 0
Here's the error for the 'add'-method:
java.lang.AssertionError: ShareCollection#size should give 1 for a collection with 1 elements.
Expected: <1>
but: was <0>
at org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat(MatcherAssert.java:20)
at org.junit.Assert.assertThat(Assert.java:956)
at jpp.marketanalysis.tests.data.TestShareCollection.hasElements(TestShareCollection.java:158)
at jpp.marketanalysis.tests.data.TestShareCollection.testAdd(TestShareCollection.java:55)
Thank you in advance for your answers!
Update:
Exchanged the ArrayList with a HashSet (see #SeanPatrickFloyd's first answer)
Possible error: Does your Share class override the .equals() method?
Because ArrayList.contains() delegates to .equals()
Also, I see at least two problems with your code:
An ArrayList is very bad at a .contains() lookup (O(n)). You should use a HashSet instead (in that case you'd need to override both .equals() and .hashCode() in your Share class), it gives you O(1) and handles the .add() method properly for you as well
The Iterator you are returning is the ArrayList's original iterator, which makes your code vulnerable in several ways, including ConcurrentModificationException if you add something while iterating, but also mutation, if someone calls .remove() on the iterator. I'd suggest you make a defensive copy of the collection and use that iterator.
Here's your code rewritten accordingly:
public class ShareCollection implements Iterable<Share>{
private final Set<Share> shares;
public ShareCollection() {
this.shares = new HashSet<>();
}
public ShareCollection(Collection<Share> shares) {
this.shares = new HashSet<>(shares);
}
public boolean add(Share share) {
if (share == null) {
throw new NullPointerException("share isnt allowed to be null!");
}
return shares.add(share);
}
#Override
public Iterator<Share> iterator() {
return new HashSet<>(shares).iterator();
}
}
I am trying to print out all the elements of a List, however it is printing the pointer of the Object rather than the value.
This is my printing code...
for(int i=0;i<list.size();i++){
System.out.println(list.get(i));
}
Could anyone please help me why it isn't printing the value of the elements.
The following is compact and avoids the loop in your example code (and gives you nice commas):
System.out.println(Arrays.toString(list.toArray()));
However, as others have pointed out, if you don't have sensible toString() methods implemented for the objects inside the list, you will get the object pointers (hash codes, in fact) you're observing. This is true whether they're in a list or not.
Since Java 8, List inherits a default "forEach" method which you can combine with the method reference "System.out::println" like this:
list.forEach(System.out::println);
Here is some example about getting print out the list component:
public class ListExample {
public static void main(String[] args) {
List<Model> models = new ArrayList<>();
// TODO: First create your model and add to models ArrayList, to prevent NullPointerException for trying this example
// Print the name from the list....
for(Model model : models) {
System.out.println(model.getName());
}
// Or like this...
for(int i = 0; i < models.size(); i++) {
System.out.println(models.get(i).getName());
}
}
}
class Model {
private String name;
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public void setName(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
}
System.out.println(list);//toString() is easy and good enough for debugging.
toString() of AbstractCollection will be clean and easy enough to do that. AbstractList is a subclass of AbstractCollection, so no need to for loop and no toArray() needed.
Returns a string representation of this collection. The string representation consists of a list of the collection's elements in the
order they are returned by its iterator, enclosed in square brackets
("[]"). Adjacent elements are separated by the characters ", " (comma
and space). Elements are converted to strings as by
String.valueOf(Object).
If you are using any custom object in your list, say Student , you need to override its toString() method(it is always good to override this method) to have a meaningful output
See the below example:
public class TestPrintElements {
public static void main(String[] args) {
//Element is String, Integer,or other primitive type
List<String> sList = new ArrayList<String>();
sList.add("string1");
sList.add("string2");
System.out.println(sList);
//Element is custom type
Student st1=new Student(15,"Tom");
Student st2=new Student(16,"Kate");
List<Student> stList=new ArrayList<Student>();
stList.add(st1);
stList.add(st2);
System.out.println(stList);
}
}
public class Student{
private int age;
private String name;
public Student(int age, String name){
this.age=age;
this.name=name;
}
#Override
public String toString(){
return "student "+name+", age:" +age;
}
}
output:
[string1, string2]
[student Tom age:15, student Kate age:16]
Use String.join()
for example:
System.out.print(String.join("\n", list));
The Java 8 Streams approach...
list.stream().forEach(System.out::println);
The objects in the list must have toString implemented for them to print something meaningful to screen.
Here's a quick test to see the differences:
public class Test {
public class T1 {
public Integer x;
}
public class T2 {
public Integer x;
#Override
public String toString() {
return x.toString();
}
}
public void run() {
T1 t1 = new T1();
t1.x = 5;
System.out.println(t1);
T2 t2 = new T2();
t2.x = 5;
System.out.println(t2);
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
new Test().run();
}
}
And when this executes, the results printed to screen are:
t1 = Test$T1#19821f
t2 = 5
Since T1 does not override the toString method, its instance t1 prints out as something that isn't very useful. On the other hand, T2 overrides toString, so we control what it prints when it is used in I/O, and we see something a little better on screen.
Or you could simply use the Apache Commons utilities:
https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-lang/apidocs/org/apache/commons/lang3/ArrayUtils.html#toString-java.lang.Object-
List<MyObject> myObjects = ...
System.out.println(ArrayUtils.toString(myObjects));
Consider a List<String> stringList which can be printed in many ways using Java 8 constructs:
stringList.forEach(System.out::println); // 1) Iterable.forEach
stringList.stream().forEach(System.out::println); // 2) Stream.forEach (order maintained generally but doc does not guarantee)
stringList.stream().forEachOrdered(System.out::println); // 3) Stream.forEachOrdered (order maintained always)
stringList.parallelStream().forEach(System.out::println); // 4) Parallel version of Stream.forEach (order not maintained)
stringList.parallelStream().forEachOrdered(System.out::println); // 5) Parallel version ofStream.forEachOrdered (order maintained always)
How are these approaches different from each other?
First Approach (Iterable.forEach)-
The iterator of the collection is generally used and that is designed to be fail-fast which means it will throw ConcurrentModificationException if the underlying collection is structurally modified during the iteration. As mentioned in the doc for ArrayList:
A structural modification is any operation that adds or deletes one or
more elements, or explicitly resizes the backing array; merely setting
the value of an element is not a structural modification.
So it means for ArrayList.forEach setting the value is allowed without any issue. And in case of concurrent collection e.g. ConcurrentLinkedQueue the iterator would be weakly-consistent which means the actions passed in forEach are allowed to make even structural changes without ConcurrentModificationExceptionexception being thrown. But here the modifications might or might not be visible in that iteration.
Second Approach (Stream.forEach)-
The order is undefined. Though it may not occur for sequential streams but the specification does not guarantee it. Also the action is required to be non-interfering in nature. As mentioned in doc:
The behavior of this operation is explicitly nondeterministic. For
parallel stream pipelines, this operation does not guarantee to
respect the encounter order of the stream, as doing so would sacrifice
the benefit of parallelism.
Third Approach (Stream.forEachOrdered)-
The action would be performed in the encounter order of the stream. So whenever order matters use forEachOrdered without a second thought. As mentioned in the doc:
Performs an action for each element of this stream, in the encounter
order of the stream if the stream has a defined encounter order.
While iterating over a synchronized collection the first approach would take the collection's lock once and would hold it across all the calls to action method, but in case of streams they use collection's spliterator, which does not lock and relies on the already established rules of non-interference. In case collection backing the stream is modified during iteration a ConcurrentModificationException would be thrown or inconsistent result may occur.
Fourth Approach (Parallel Stream.forEach)-
As already mentioned no guarantee to respect the encounter order as expected in case of parallel streams. It is possible that action is performed in different thread for different elements which can never be the case with forEachOrdered.
Fifth Approach (Parallel Stream.forEachOrdered)-
The forEachOrdered will process the elements in the order specified by the source irrespective of the fact whether stream is sequential or parallel. So it makes no sense to use this with parallel streams.
I have faced similar problems. My code:
List<Integer> leaveDatesList = new ArrayList<>();
.....inserted value in list.......
Way 1: printing a list in a for loop
for(int i=0;i<leaveDatesList.size();i++){
System.out.println(leaveDatesList.get(i));
}
Way 2: printing the list in a forEach, for loop
for(Integer leave : leaveDatesList){
System.out.println(leave);
}
Way 3: printing the list in java 8
leaveDatesList.forEach(System.out::println);
You haven't specified what kind of elements the list contains, if it is a primitive data type then you can print out the elements.
But if the elements are objects then as Kshitij Mehta mentioned you need to implement (override) the method "toString" within that object - if it is not already implemented - and let it return something meaning full from within the object, example:
class Person {
private String firstName;
private String lastName;
#Override
public String toString() {
return this.firstName + " " + this.lastName;
}
}
It depends on what type of objects stored in the List, and whether it has implementation for toString() method. System.out.println(list) should print all the standard java object types (String, Long, Integer etc). In case, if we are using custom object types, then we need to override toString() method of our custom object.
Example:
class Employee {
private String name;
private long id;
#Override
public String toString() {
return "name: " + this.name() +
", id: " + this.id();
}
}
Test:
class TestPrintList {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Employee employee1 =new Employee("test1", 123);
Employee employee2 =new Employee("test2", 453);
List<Employee> employees = new ArrayList(2);
employee.add(employee1);
employee.add(employee2);
System.out.println(employees);
}
}
For a list of array of String
list.forEach(s -> System.out.println(Arrays.toString((String[]) s )));
For loop to print the content of a list :
List<String> myList = new ArrayList<String>();
myList.add("AA");
myList.add("BB");
for ( String elem : myList ) {
System.out.println("Element : "+elem);
}
Result :
Element : AA
Element : BB
If you want to print in a single line (just for information) :
String strList = String.join(", ", myList);
System.out.println("Elements : "+strList);
Result :
Elements : AA, BB
System.out.println(list); works for me.
Here is a full example:
import java.util.List;
import java.util.ArrayList;
public class HelloWorld {
public static void main(String[] args) {
final List<String> list = new ArrayList<>();
list.add("Hello");
list.add("World");
System.out.println(list);
}
}
It will print [Hello, World].
list.stream().map(x -> x.getName()).forEach(System.out::println);
I wrote a dump function, which basicly prints out the public members of an object if it has not overriden toString(). One could easily expand it to call getters.
Javadoc:
Dumps an given Object to System.out, using the following rules:
If the Object is Iterable, all of its components are dumped.
If the Object or one of its superclasses overrides toString(), the "toString" is dumped
Else the method is called recursively for all public members of the Object
/**
* Dumps an given Object to System.out, using the following rules:<br>
* <ul>
* <li> If the Object is {#link Iterable}, all of its components are dumped.</li>
* <li> If the Object or one of its superclasses overrides {#link #toString()}, the "toString" is dumped</li>
* <li> Else the method is called recursively for all public members of the Object </li>
* </ul>
* #param input
* #throws Exception
*/
public static void dump(Object input) throws Exception{
dump(input, 0);
}
private static void dump(Object input, int depth) throws Exception{
if(input==null){
System.out.print("null\n"+indent(depth));
return;
}
Class<? extends Object> clazz = input.getClass();
System.out.print(clazz.getSimpleName()+" ");
if(input instanceof Iterable<?>){
for(Object o: ((Iterable<?>)input)){
System.out.print("\n"+indent(depth+1));
dump(o, depth+1);
}
}else if(clazz.getMethod("toString").getDeclaringClass().equals(Object.class)){
Field[] fields = clazz.getFields();
if(fields.length == 0){
System.out.print(input+"\n"+indent(depth));
}
System.out.print("\n"+indent(depth+1));
for(Field field: fields){
Object o = field.get(input);
String s = "|- "+field.getName()+": ";
System.out.print(s);
dump(o, depth+1);
}
}else{
System.out.print(input+"\n"+indent(depth));
}
}
private static String indent(int depth) {
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
for(int i=0; i<depth; i++)
sb.append(" ");
return sb.toString();
}
I happen to be working on this now...
List<Integer> a = Arrays.asList(1, 2, 3);
List<Integer> b = Arrays.asList(3, 4);
List<int[]> pairs = a.stream()
.flatMap(x -> b.stream().map(y -> new int[]{x, y}))
.collect(Collectors.toList());
Consumer<int[]> pretty = xs -> System.out.printf("\n(%d,%d)", xs[0], xs[1]);
pairs.forEach(pretty);
public static void main(String[] args) {
answer(10,60);
}
public static void answer(int m,int k){
AtomicInteger n = new AtomicInteger(m);
Stream<Integer> stream = Stream.generate(() -> n.incrementAndGet()).limit(k);
System.out.println(Arrays.toString(stream.toArray()));
}
try to override toString() method as you want that the element will be printend.
so the method to print can be this:
for(int i=0;i<list.size();i++){
System.out.println(list.get(i).toString());
}
Solusion of your problem for java 11 is:
String separator = ", ";
String toPrint = list.stream().map(o -> String.valueOf(o)).collect(Collectors.joining(separator));
System.out.println(toPrint);
You can try:
for 2D(or more)
System.out.println(Arrays.deepToString(list.toArray()));
for 1D
System.out.println(Arrays.toString(list.toArray()))
List<String> textList= messageList.stream()
.map(Message::getText)
.collect(Collectors.toList());
textList.stream().forEach(System.out::println);
public class Message {
String name;
String text;
public Message(String name, String text) {
this.name = name;
this.text = text;
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public String getText() {
return text;
}
}
public Solution getReferenceSolution(Problem p)
throws UnsupportedOperationException {
Solution result;
if (!haveReferenceSolution)
throw new UnsupportedOperationException("Domain.getReferenceSolution: A getReferenceSolution() method has not been specified for this domain. If its use is required, please specify one using setEquivalenceClasses() or by overriding Domain.getReferenceSolution().");
else {
if (haveBooleanSolutionCutoff)
result = findNearestEquivalenceClass(p).applyTo(p, booleanSolutionCutoff);
else
result = findNearestEquivalenceClass(p).applyTo(p);
}
result.setIsReferenceSolution(true);
return result;
}
If you only need one solution normally, but one place needs multiple solutions, I suggest you have two methods; something like this:
public Solution getReferenceSolution(Problem p)
{
// Code as before
}
public List<Solution> getAllSolutions(Problem p)
{
// Whatever you need to do here
}
Note how it's now obvious from the method name whether you're looking for one solution or multiple ones; I wouldn't use overloading in this situation, as you're trying to do different things.
Do you mean like this?
public Solution[] getReferenceSolution(Problem p) {
Solution result;
// set result.
return new Solution[] { result };
}
Maybe better to return a collection, e.g. an ArrayList:
public List<Solution> getReferenceSolution(Problem p)
throws UnsupportedOperationException {
List<Solution> solutions= new ArrayList<Solution>();
Solution result = ... // your code here
solutions.add(result);
return solutions;
}
Or maybe you want to pass the List as argument to the getReferenceSolution method and fill it inside the method?
public void getReferenceSolution(Problem p, List<Solution> solutions)
throws UnsupportedOperationException {
// your code to fill the list using solutions.add(Solution)
}