I'm using a arraylist to add states(the board state for the 8 puzzle). My problem is when I get the children of the state it changes the values stored in my array list. I'm assuming this is because ArrayList just stores pointers to the objects and not the values themselves. In order to fix this I create a new object every time before I store it into the ArrayList but I'm still having the same problem.
I will also try to follow naming conventions more often thanks for the tip.
private ArrayList<int[][]>VisitedBoard;
if(RuleNumber ==2){
//Here is my problem. This will change what is stored in VistedBoards
NextState = new State(FireRule.Rule2(WM.get_Board()));//Fire Rule
for(int j=0;j<VisitedBoards.size();j++){
//Meaning this will always be true
if(Arrays.equals(VisitedBoards.get(j), NextState.get_Board())){
Loop =true; //Loop to previous state
}
if(j==VisitedBoards.size()-1 && Loop ==false){ //If the next state is not any previously visited
NotALoop =true;
VisitedBoards.add(NextState.get_Board());
WM.set_Board(NextState.get_Board());
}
}
}
public int[][] Rule2(int [][] Board){//The FireRule Class
Find_BlankLocation(Board);
int temp;
State NewState;
temp = Board[BlankLocation[0]-1][BlankLocation[1]];
Board[BlankLocation[0]-1][BlankLocation[1]] = 0;
Board[BlankLocation[0]][BlankLocation[1]] = temp;
NewState = new State(Board);
return Board;
}
public class State { //State class
private int[][] Board;
private int[][] Goal;
private Boolean GoalFound;
public State(int[][] Start, int[][] goal){
Board = Start;
Goal = goal;
GoalFound=false;
}
public State(int[][] NewState){
Board=NewState;
}
public int[][] get_Goal(){
return Goal;
}
public int[][] get_Board(){
return Board;
}
public void set_Board(int[][] board){
Board = board;
}
public Boolean get_GoalFound(){
return GoalFound;
}
}
Containers like ArrayList work the same in all languages: they are called data structures because they organize storage/retrieval of objects. Obviously they don't store the fields of the objects themselves.
Trying to interpret your problem, maybe you don't want to share the boards between the list of visitedBoards and WM (whatever it means...). Then simply implement get_Board() to return a copy of the array instead of the Board object itself:
public int[][] get_Board(int[][] src) {
int[][] dst = new int[src.length][src[0].length];
for (int i = 0; i < src.length; i++) {
System.arraycopy(src[i], 0, dst[i], 0, src[i].length);
}
return dst;return dst;
}
Beside this, as others already told you, you'd really better to adopt the standard Java naming conventions, use meaningful names, and encapsulate your x, y and int[][] in real application classes.
Presumably, the new State object contains a pointer to the same arrayList as before. You'll want to manually copy the array out to a new one (a "deep clone" or "deep copy" as it is called). You might find this useful: Deep cloning multidimensional arrays in Java...?
Every time you create a new instance of State, you pass it the same array (whatever is returned by WM.get_Board()).
You then add that same array to VisitedBoards when you call VisitedBoards.add().
The fact that you're creating new State objects is irrelevant, because only the return value of NextState.get_Board() gets added to the list.
As a result, the list VisitedBoards always contains several references to the exact same array.
As Raffaele has suggested, you'll be fine if you make sure get_Board() returns a copy of the array in stead of a reference to the original (assuming that doesn't mess up logic that exists elsewhere).
The main thing I learned from this question is how important it is to follow naming conventions.
Your unconventional capitalization has made me dizzy!
Following these rules will make it much easier for others to understand your Java code:
class names should be capitalized (ie PascalCase)
variable names should be lowercase (ie camelCase)
do not use underscores in method names, class names, or variable names (they should only be used for constants)
always use meaningful names when possible
My advice is to create your own container object for their 2D array and implement deep copying.
For example:
package netbeans;
import java.util.Arrays;
public class Container
implements Cloneable
{
private int [] _data;
private int _sx;
private int _sy;
public int get(int x, int y)
{
try { return this._data[y*this._sx+x]; }
catch (Exception e) { throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(); }
}
public void set(int x, int y, int value)
{
try { this._data[y*this._sx+x] = value; }
catch (Exception e) { throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(); }
}
public Object Clone() { return new Container(this); }
public Container(int sizeX, int sizeY, int [] data)
{
this._sx = sizeX;
this._sy = sizeY;
this._data = data;
}
public Container(Container cont)
{
this._data = Arrays.copyOf(cont._data, cont._data.length);
}
}
Related
I'm sitting on an assignment for university and I'm at a point, where I fear I haven't really understood something fundamental in the concecpt of Java or OOP altogether. I'll try to make it as short as possible (maybe it's sufficient to just look at the 3rd code segment, but I just wanted to make sure, I included enough detail). I am to write a little employee management. One class within this project is the employeeManagement itself and this class should possess a method for sorting employees by first letter via bubblesort.
I have written 3 classes for this: The first one is "Employee", which contains a name and an ID (a running number) , getter and setter methods and one method for checking whether the first letter of one employee is smaller (lower in the alphabet) than the other. It looks like this:
static boolean isSmaller(Employee source, Employee target) {
char[] sourceArray = new char[source.name.length()];
char[] targetArray = new char[target.name.length()];
sourceArray = source.name.toCharArray();
targetArray = target.name.toCharArray();
if(sourceArray[0] < targetArray[0])
return true;
else
return false;
}
I tested it and it seems to work for my case. Now there's another class called EmployeeList and it manages the employees via an array of employees ("Employee" objects). The size of this array is determined via constructor. My code looks like this:
public class EmployeeList {
/*attributes*/
private int size;
private Employee[] employeeArray;
/* constructor */
public EmployeeList(int size) {
this.employeeArray = new Employee[size];
}
/* methods */
public int getSize() {
return size;
}
public void setSize(int size) {
this.size = size;
}
/* adds employee to end of the list. Returns false, if list is too small */
boolean add(Employee m) {
int id = m.getID();
if (id > employeeArray.length) {
return false;
} else {
employeeArray[id] = m;
return true;
}
}
/* returns employee at certain position */
Employee get(int index) {
return employeeArray[index];
}
/* Sets employee at certain position. Returns null, if position doesn't exist. Else returns old value. */
Employee set(int index, Employee m) {
if (employeeArray[index] == null) {
return null;
} else {
Employee before = employeeArray[index];
employeeArray[index] = m;
return before;
}
}
Now comes my real problem: In a third class called "employeeManagement" I am supposed to implement the sorting algorithm. The class looks like this:
public class EmployeeManagement {
private EmployeeList ml = new EmployeeList(3);
public boolean addEmployee(Employee e) {
return ml.add(e);
}
public void sortEmployee() {
System.out.println(ml.getSize()); // I wrote this for debugging, exactly here lies my problem
for (int n = ml.getSize(); n > 1; n--) {
for (int i = 0; i < n - 1; i++) {
if (Employee.isSmaller(ml.get(i), ml.get(i + 1)) == false) {
Employee old = ml.set(i, ml.get(i + 1));
ml.set(i+1, old);
}
}
}
}
The "println" before my comment returns "0" in console... I am expecting "3" as this is the size I gave the "EmployeeList" as parameter of the constructor within my "EmployeeManagement" class. Where is my mistake ? And how can I access the size of the object I created in the "EmployeeManagement" class (the "3") ? I'm really looking forward to your answers!
Thanks,
Phreneticus
You are not storing size in your constructor. Something like,
public EmployeeList(int size) {
this.employeeArray = new Employee[size];
this.size = size; // <-- add this.
}
Also, setSize isn't going to automatically copy (and grow) the array. You will need to copy the array, because Java arrays have a fixed length. Finally, you don't really need size here since employeeArray has a length.
The size variable you are calling is the class field. If you take a quick look at your code, the getter is getting the field (which is initialized as zero when created). The size you are using it. The good way of doing it would be to get the size of the array in the getter like this:
public int getSize() {
return employeeArray.length;
}
This would return the size of the array in the object.
i have some trouble with deep copying.
I have this java project, chess, and I need to use the clone() method, because I need to try new configurations without changing the board.
Board scacchiera = new Board();
Initialization(scacchiera);
Board clone = scacchiera.clone();
System.out.println(scacchiera.toString());
System.out.println(clone.toString());
I create an object, scacchiera, then I clone it. I think I have done correctly a deep copy, but when I change something in scacchiera, clone changes too.
In object Board:
public class Board implements Cloneable{
//TODO
//rivedere se check e checkmate public o private;
//se private, costruire get e set;
public Pedine[][] board;
public boolean check;
public boolean checkmate;
//creating 2 lists for all the pieces; Neri=black, Bianchi=White
public ArrayList<Pedine> Neri;
public ArrayList<Pedine> Bianchi;
public Board(){
this.board = new Pedine [8][8];
this.check = false;
this.checkmate = false;
this.Neri = new ArrayList<Pedine>();
this.Bianchi = new ArrayList<Pedine>();
}
...
#Override
public Board clone() throws CloneNotSupportedException{
Board cloned = (Board) super.clone();
cloned.board = (Pedine[][]) board.clone();
return cloned;
}
I have this double array of Pedine, and I have to clone it too, so I do:
public class Pedine implements Cloneable{
private int x;
private int y;
private Piece pezzo;
private Colour colore;
...
#Override
public Pedine clone() throws CloneNotSupportedException{
return (Pedine) super.clone();
}
Why it doesn't work?
I tried this code too, but it doesn't work.
#Override
public Board clone() throws CloneNotSupportedException{
Board cloned = (Board) super.clone();
cloned.board = (Pedine[][]) board.clone();
for (int i=0; i<8; i++)
for(int j=0; j<8; j++){
cloned.board[i][j] = board[i][j].clone();
}
return cloned;
}
(Pedine extends Object)
The problem, as sharonbn indicates, is in the double-array. While you can clone it manually with a double-loop, your chess engine is going to suffer a performance penalty: you will be cloning a lot of boards, and you can benefit from making them a lot easier to copy around.
One option is to use a flat array and some clever addressing to speed things up:
private Piece[] board; // 64 Pieces in there
public Piece at(col, row) {
if (row < 0 || row >= 8 || col < 0 || col >= 8) return null;
return board[col + row*8];
}
Now, instead of accessing board[row][col] you use at(col, row). And copying and creating boards is a lot easier:
board = other.board.clone();
... should now work as expected.
I also strongly recommend having immutable pieces, with no state information whatsoever. Your current pieces have an x and y field, for example. What do they need those for? You should tell them their actual positions only while moving them; that way, you don't need to clone pieces at all -- because all pawns are exactly alike, and you can actually use the same "black pawn" for everything black-pawn related.
deep cloning of multi dimension arrays should be custom coded, as is explained here
So lets say I have a class BaseballCard that creates a baseball card.
Now I need to make another class which would be my collection class.
For example I would call it BaseballCardCollection
and then I want to create methods like
size (which returns the numbers of cards in the collection)
addCard(adds a baseball object to the collection object)
removeCard (removes a baseball card)
and so on
What would be the best way to do this. I tried doing this
public CardCollectionList() {
BaseballCard[] baseballCardList = new BaseballCard[101];
}
So each object is insinuated with an array of type BaseballCard of size 100.
And then for example the size method I tried something like this
public int size(){
int size = 0;
for(int i = 1; i<this.baseballCardList.length; i++)
if (baseballCardList!= null)
size+=1;
}
But it doesn't work because "baseballCardList cannot be resolved to a variable"
You could try using ArrayLists - http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/ArrayList.html:
ArrayList<baseballCard> baseballCardList = new ArrayList<baseballCard>(0);
public boolean addCard(baseballCard card){
return baseballCardList.add(card);
}
public boolean removeCard(int card){
return baseballCardList.remove(card);
}
public baseballCard getCard(int card){
return baseballCardList.get(card);
}
public int sizeBaseballCardList(){
return baseballCardList.size();
}
public ArrayList<baseballCard> getBaseballCardList(){
return baseballCardList;
}
Move the variable BaseballCard[] baseballCardList outside the constructor, make it a field in your class. Do similar with size.
This is how the class should look like:
public class CardCollectionList {
//fields
private BaseballCard[] baseballCardList;
private int size;
//constructor
public CardCollectionList() {
baseballCardList = new BaseballCard[101];
}
//method
public int getSize() {
return this.size;
}
}
You could try creating your own class implementing the Collection interface and define your own methods + implement Collection methods:
public class myContainer implements Collection <BaseballCard> {
}
You need to move the variable declaration from the constructor to the class, so you can access it in other methods, too.
class CardCollectionList {
BaseballCard[] baseballCardList;
public CardCollectionList() {
baseballCardList = new BaseballCard[101];
}
public int size(){
int size = 0;
for(int i = 1; i<this.baseballCardList.length; i++) {
if (baseballCardList[i] != null) {
size+=1;
}
}
return size;
}
}
The code is as close to your fragment as possible. There are several ways to improve this (keep track of the size when adding, automatic array reallocation etc.). But it is a start if you want to try this yourself.
Normally, you'd probably just use ArrayList<BaseballCard>.
Now I need to make another class which would be my collection class.
... What would be the best way to do this.
I don't have enough reputation to comment on your question, so I am going to assume that you just want to store BaseballCard objects in a Java Collection. The Java SDK offers a lot of options. Since you are asking about the "best" way to go then I would use one of those unless you need to add additional functionality .
if you don't find what you need from the Java SDK or just want to create your own Collection then follow the advice given by #michał-szydłowski above
So this is a stupid dbeginner's question.
I wrote a function that checks if a specific game move is legal (Reversi). The function must only return a boolean true/false value.
Later, in a different function, I actually make the move (makeMove function). In this function, before making the move I call the isLegal function to make sure the move is legal.
Now, when the isLegal function decides the move is legal, it would help me to save the specific info that lead to the decision, and use it in the makeMove function. I have no ideah ow to do that. I tried writing a function that will store the relevant data, and then send it back, but there's an obvious provlem with scopes here.
So here's the relevant code from isLegal:
else if(board[k][l]==player){relevantDirection=false; isLegal=true; ReversiPlay.saveLegalMove(direction, k, l);}
Then the problematic saving function:
public static int[] saveLegalMove(int direction, int row, int column){
if(direction==0){ //get info from function
return legalMoveData;
}
else{ //save legal move data
int[] legalMoveData = new int[3];
legalMoveData[0]= direction;
legalMoveData[1]= row;
legalMoveData[2]= column;
return null;
}
}
And lastly, I try calling the stored data:
int[] getSavedInfo = ReversiPlay.saveLegalMove(0, 0, 0);
I'm sure there's a very simple way of pulling the variables direction+k+l... anyone?
Thanks!
Edit: Here's a clearer example:
public static boolean A(int a){
...calculations...
int x = [value]
int y = [value]
return false;}
public static void B(int a){
...calculations...
boolean h = A(3);
[here I'd like to know what x,y were]
}
else { //save legal move data
int[] legalMoveData = new int[3];
legalMoveData[0]= direction;
legalMoveData[1]= row;
legalMoveData[2]= column;
return null;
}
This part doesn't save anything. It stores the values to a local variable and returns null.
An approach would be to make a Move object that contains the data you need:
public class Move {
private int direction;
private int row;
private int column;
...
}
Your isLegal method would only tell you if the move is legal. Then you can use that same Move instance to make the move.
if(ReversiPlay.isLegalMove(move)) {
ReversiPlay.makeMove(move);
}
There is no need to explicitly save the move; you already have that information inside the Move object instance.
UPDATE
Based on your edit, perhaps it is better to return an object instead of a boolean from A:
public static boolean A(int a) {
...calculations...
int x = [value]
int y = [value]
return new MyObject(x, y, false);
}
...
MyObject myObject = A(someValue);
Then you can query myObject to see what the value of the flag is.
UPDATE
You mentioned you aren't allowed to use objects. If so, instead of making the same calculations however, you can extract that logic into its own method and then call that. That way you won't have to duplicate logic.
I recently came across a very stupid (at least from my point of view) implementation inside Androids Parcel class.
Suppose I have a simple class like this
class Foo implements Parcelable{
private String[] bars;
//other members
public in describeContents(){
return 0;
}
public void writeToParcel(Parcel dest, int flags){
dest.writeStringArray(bars);
//parcel others
}
private Foo(Parcel source){
source.readStringArray(bars);
//unparcel other members
}
public static final Parcelable.Creator<Foo> CREATOR = new Parcelable.Creator<Foo>(){
public Foo createFromParcel(Parcel source){
return new Foo(source);
}
public Foo[] newArray(int size){
return new Foo[size];
}
};
}
Now, if I want to Parcel a Foo Object and bars is null I see no way to recover from this situation (exept of catching Exceptions of course). Here is the implementation of these two methods from Parcel:
public final void writeStringArray(String[] val) {
if (val != null) {
int N = val.length;
writeInt(N);
for (int i=0; i<N; i++) {
writeString(val[i]);
}
} else {
writeInt(-1);
}
}
public final void readStringArray(String[] val) {
int N = readInt();
if (N == val.length) {
for (int i=0; i<N; i++) {
val[i] = readString();
}
} else {
throw new RuntimeException("bad array lengths");
}
}
So writeStringArray is fine if I pass bars which are null. It just writes -1 to the Parcel. But How is the method readStringArray supposed to get used? If I pass bars inside (which of course is null) I will get a NullPointerException from val.length. If I create bars before like say bars = new String[???] I don't get any clue how big it should be. If the size doesn't match what was written inside I recieve a RuntimeException.
Why is readStringArray not aware of a result of -1 which gets written on null objects from writeStringArray and just returns?
The only way I see is to save the size of bars before I call writeStringArray(String[]) which makes this method kind of useless. It will also redundatly save the size of the Array twice (one time for me to remember, the second time from writeStringArray).
Does anyone know how these two methods are supposed to be used, as there is NO java-doc for them on top?
You should use Parcel.createStringArray() in your case.
I can't imagine a proper use-case for Parcel.readStringArray(String[] val) but in order to use it you have to know the exact size of array and manually allocate it.
It's not really clear from the (lack of) documentation but readStringArray() is to be used when the object already knows how to create the string array before calling this function; for example when it's statistically instanciated or it's size is known from another previously read value.
What you need here is to call the function createStringArray() instead.