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;
}
Related
I have a class Product, which three variables:
class Product implements Comparable<Product>{
private Type type; // Type is an enum
Set<Attribute> attributes; // Attribute is a regular class
ProductName name; // ProductName is another enum
}
I used Eclipse to automatically generate the equal() and hashcode() methods:
#Override
public int hashCode() {
final int prime = 31;
int result = 1;
result = prime * result + ((attributes == null) ? 0 : attributes.hashCode());
result = prime * result + ((type == null) ? 0 : type.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;
Product other = (Product) obj;
if (attributes == null) {
if (other.attributes != null)
return false;
} else if (!attributes.equals(other.attributes))
return false;
if (type != other.type)
return false;
return true;
}
Now in my application I need to sort a Set of Product, so I need to implement the Comparable interface and compareTo method:
#Override
public int compareTo(Product other){
int diff = type.hashCode() - other.getType().hashCode();
if (diff > 0) {
return 1;
} else if (diff < 0) {
return -1;
}
diff = attributes.hashCode() - other.getAttributes().hashCode();
if (diff > 0) {
return 1;
} else if (diff < 0) {
return -1;
}
return 0;
}
Does this implementation make sense? What about if I just want to sort the product based on the String values of "type" and "attributes" values. So how to implement this?
Edit:
The reason I want to sort a Set of is because I have Junit test which asserts on the string values of a HashSet. My goal is to maintain the same order of output as I sort the set. otherwise, even if the Set's values are the same, the assertion will fail due to random output of a set.
Edit2:
Through the discussion, it's clear that to assert the equality of String values of a HashSet isn't good in unit tests. For my situation I currently write a sort() function to sort the HashSet String values in natural ordering, so it can consistently output the same String value for my unit tests and that suffice for now. Thanks all.
Looks like from all the comments in here you dont need to use Comparator at all. Because:
1) You are using HashSet that does not work with Comparator. It is not ordered.
2) You just need to make sure that two HashSets containing Products are equal. It means they are same size and contain the same set of Products.
Since you already added hashCode and equals methods to Product all you need to do is call equals method on those HashSets.
HashSet<Product> set1 = ...
HashSet<Product> set2 = ...
assertTrue( set1.equals(set2) );
This implementation does not seem to be consistent. You have no control over how the hash codes look like. If you have obj1 < obj2 according to compareTo in the first try, the next time you start your JVM it could be the other way around obj1 > obj2.
The only thing that you really know is that if diff == 0 then the objects are considered to be equal. However you can also just use the equals method for that check.
It is now up to you how you define when obj1 < obj2 or obj1 > obj2. Just make sure that it is consistent.
By the way, you know that the current implementation does not include ProductName name in the equals check? Dont know if that is intended thus the remark.
The question is, what do you know about that attributes? Maybe they implement Comparable (for example if they are Numbers), then you can order according to their compareTo method. If you totally know nothing about the objects, it will be hard to build up a consistent ordering.
If you just want them to be ordered consistently but the ordering itself does not play any role, you could just give them ids at creation time and sort by them. At this point you could indeed use the hashcodes if it does not matter that it can change between JVM calls, but only then.
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;
}
}
I am getting a warning that watchStore.contains(s) is a suspicious call to java.util.Collection#contains. How can I fix it? I want to use contains() to find a particular object with the matching serial number.
public Watch findWatchBySerialNumber(long srch) {
long s = srch;
Watch watch = null;
for(int i = 0; i < watchStore.size(); i++) {
watch = watchStore.get(i);
if(watchStore.contains(s)) {
System.out.print("item found");
return watch;
}
}
System.out.print("item not found");
return null; // watch is not found.
}
Presuming that Watch is the class, watchStore is a List<Watch>, and that a field serialNo exists on Watch...
public Optional<Watch> findWatchBySerialNumber(long serial) {
return watchStore.stream()
.filter(w -> w.getSerialNo() == serial)
.findFirst();
}
If you're not using Java 8, the code is close, but a bit more dangerous since you have the chance to return null. If you can use Guava's Optional, that'd be a better choice here.
public Watch findWatchBySerialNumber(long serial) {
for(Watch w : watchStore) {
if(w.getSerialNo() == serial) {
return w;
}
}
return null;
}
Your contains isn't going to work since your list doesn't contain Longs, it contains Watchs. This is also why the compiler sees it as dubious; contains accepts an Object but it will return false if what you're looking for doesn't have a comparable equals for what's in your list.
You have to iterate over the entirety of your collection to find it in this scenario, especially since you're looking for a specific property on those objects as opposed to a specific, easy-to-provide value.
please how can I fix that. I want to use the contain() to find a
particular object with the matching serial number.
In that case override Watch's equals() to use serialNumber field for comparison.
Then add constructor that accepts serialNumber.
public class Watch {
private final long serialNumber;
public Watch(long serialNumber) {
this.serialNumber = serialNumber;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
return obj == this ||
(obj instanceof Watch && ((Watch)obj).serialNumber == serialNumber);
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
return (int)serialNumber;
}
}
Replace if(watchStore.contains(s)){ with if(watchStore.contains(watchToFind)){ where Watch watchToFind = new Watch(s);
you can use contains method from org.apache.commons.lang.ArrayUtils package.
Checks if the value is in the given array.
The method returns false if a null array is passed in.
Parameters:
array the array to search through
valueToFind the value to find
Returns:
true if the array contains the object
long [] imageHashes= {12l,13l,14l,15l};
System.out.println(ArrayUtils.contains(imageHashes, 13l));
I was asked this in interview. using Google Guava or MultiMap is not an option.
I have a class
public class Alpha
{
String company;
int local;
String title;
}
I have many instances of this class (in order of millions). I need to process them and at the end find the unique ones and their duplicates.
e.g.
instance --> instance1, instance5, instance7 (instance1 has instance5 and instance7 as duplicates)
instance2 --> instance2 (no duplicates for instance 2)
My code works fine
declare datastructure
HashMap<Alpha,ArrayList<Alpha>> hashmap = new HashMap<Alpha,ArrayList<Alpha>>();
Add instances
for (Alpha x : arr)
{
ArrayList<Alpha> list = hashmap.get(x); ///<<<<---- doubt about this. comment#1
if (list == null)
{
list = new ArrayList<Alpha>();
hashmap.put(x, list);
}
list.add(x);
}
Print instances and their duplicates.
for (Alpha x : hashmap.keySet())
{
ArrayList<Alpha> list = hashmap.get(x); //<<< doubt about this. comment#2
System.out.println(x + "<---->");
for(Alpha y : list)
{
System.out.print(y);
}
System.out.println();
}
Question: My code works, but why? when I do hashmap.get(x); (comment#1 in code). it is possible that two different instances might have same hashcode. In that case, I will add 2 different objects to the same List.
When I retrieve, I should get a List which has 2 different instances. (comment#2) and when I iterate over the list, I should see at least one instance which is not duplicate of the key but still exists in the list. I don't. Why?. I tried returning constant value from my hashCode function, it works fine.
If you want to see my implementation of equals and hashCode,let me know.
Bonus question: Any way to optimize it?
Edit:
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (obj==null || obj.getClass()!=this.getClass())
return false;
if (obj==this)
return true;
Alpha guest = (Alpha)obj;
return guest.getLocal()==this.getLocal()
&& guest.getCompany() == this.getCompany()
&& guest.getTitle() == this.getTitle();
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
final int prime = 31;
int result = 1;
result = prime * result + (title==null?0:title.hashCode());
result = prime * result + local;
result = prime * result + (company==null?0:company.hashCode());
return result;
}
it is possible that two different instances might have same hashcode
Yes, but hashCode method is used to identify the index to store the element. Two or more keys could have the same hashCode but that's why they are also evaluated using equals.
From Map#containsKey javadoc:
Returns true if this map contains a mapping for the specified key. More formally, returns true if and only if this map contains a mapping for a key k such that (key==null ? k==null : key.equals(k)). (There can be at most one such mapping.)
Some enhancements to your current code:
Code oriented to interfaces. Use Map and instantiate it by HashMap. Similar to List and ArrayList.
Compare Strings and Objects in general using equals method. == compares references, equals compares the data stored in the Object depending the implementation of this method. So, change the code in Alpha#equals:
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (obj==null || obj.getClass()!=this.getClass())
return false;
if (obj==this)
return true;
Alpha guest = (Alpha)obj;
return guest.getLocal().equals(this.getLocal())
&& guest.getCompany().equals(this.getCompany())
&& guest.getTitle().equals(this.getTitle());
}
When navigating through all the elements of a map in pairs, use Map#entrySet instead, you can save the time used by Map#get (since it is supposed to be O(1) you won't save that much but it is better):
for (Map.Entry<Alpha, List<Alpha>> entry : hashmap.keySet()) {
List<Alpha> list = entry.getValuee();
System.out.println(entry.getKey() + "<---->");
for(Alpha y : list) {
System.out.print(y);
}
System.out.println();
}
Use equals along with hashCode to solve the collision state.
Steps:
First compare on the basis of title in hashCode()
If the title is same then look into equals() based on company name to resolve the collision state.
Sample code
class Alpha {
String company;
int local;
String title;
public Alpha(String company, int local, String title) {
this.company = company;
this.local = local;
this.title = title;
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
return title.hashCode();
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (obj instanceof Alpha) {
return this.company.equals(((Alpha) obj).company);
}
return false;
}
}
...
Map<Alpha, ArrayList<Alpha>> hashmap = new HashMap<Alpha, ArrayList<Alpha>>();
hashmap.put(new Alpha("a", 1, "t1"), new ArrayList<Alpha>());
hashmap.put(new Alpha("b", 2, "t1"), new ArrayList<Alpha>());
hashmap.put(new Alpha("a", 3, "t1"), new ArrayList<Alpha>());
System.out.println("Size : "+hashmap.size());
Output
Size : 2
I want to compare database dump to xml and *.sql. In debagge toRemove and toAdd only differ in dimension. toRemove has size 3, toAdd has size 4. But after running the code, removeAll, toRemove has size 3 and toAdd has size 4. What's wrong?
final DBHashSet fromdb = new DBHashSet(strURL, strUser, strPassword);
final DBHashSet fromxml = new DBHashSet(namefile);
Set<DBRecord> toRemove = new HashSet<DBRecord>(fromdb);
toRemove.removeAll(fromxml);
Set<DBRecord> toAdd = new HashSet<DBRecord>(fromxml);
toAdd.removeAll(fromdb);
Update:
public class DBRecord {
public String depcode;
public String depjob;
public String description;
public DBRecord(String newdepcode, String newdepjobe, String newdesc) {
this.depcode = newdepcode;
this.depjob = newdepjobe;
this.description = newdesc;
}
public String getKey() {
return depcode + depjob;
}
public boolean IsEqualsKey(DBRecord rec) {
return (this.getKey().equals(rec.getKey()));
}
public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (o == this)
return true;
if (o == null)
return false;
if (!(getClass() == o.getClass()))
return false;
else {
DBRecord rec = (DBRecord) o;
if ((rec.depcode.equals(this.depcode)) && (rec.depjob.equals(this.depjob)))
return true;
else
return false;
}
}
}
In order to properly use HashSet (and HashMap, for that matter), you must implement a hashCode() as per the following contract:
Whenever it is invoked on the same object more than once during an execution of a Java application, the hashCode method must consistently return the same integer, provided no information used in equals comparisons on the object is modified. This integer need not remain consistent from one execution of an application to another execution of the same application.
If two objects are equal according to the equals(Object) method, then calling the hashCode method on each of the two objects must produce the same integer result.
It is not required that if two objects are unequal according to the equals(java.lang.Object) method, then calling the hashCode method on each of the two objects must produce distinct integer results. However, the programmer should be aware that producing distinct integer results for unequal objects may improve the performance of hash tables.
The code you've supplied for DBRecord does not overide it, hence the problem.
You'd probably want to override it in the following way, or something similar:
#Override
public int hashCode() {
final int prime = 31;
int result = 1;
result = prime * result + depcode.hashCode();
result = prime * result + depjob.hashCode());
return result;
}