Develop Reference

How to turn FibSupplier into a generic FiniteSupplier?

Considering I have the following class:
public class Problem2 extends Problem<Integer> {
#Override
public void run() {
result = toList(new FibSupplier(i -> (i <= 4_000_000)))
.stream()
.filter(i -> (i % 2 == 0))
.mapToInt(i -> i)
.sum();
}
#Override
public String getName() {
return "Problem 2";
}
private static <E> List<E> toList(final Iterator<E> iterator) {
List<E> list = new ArrayList<>();
while (iterator.hasNext()) {
list.add(iterator.next());
}
return list;
}
private class FibSupplier implements Iterator<Integer> {
private final IntPredicate hasNextPredicate;
private int beforePrevious = 0;
private int previous = 1;
public FibSupplier(final IntPredicate hasNextPredicate) {
this.hasNextPredicate = hasNextPredicate;
}
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
return hasNextPredicate.test(previous);
}
#Override
public Integer next() {
int result = beforePrevious + previous;
beforePrevious = previous;
previous = result;
return result;
}
}
}
If you take a look at FibSupplier you can see that it exposes a generalized problem, even though it has a specialized implementation here, what I've managed to extract are:
It has a Predicate.
It has initial variables.
It has a variable that needs to be tested by the predicate.
It has a custom next() method.
My attempt to generalize this was with the following, note that I use a generic version for now instead of a specialized integer version:
public class FiniteSupplier<E> implements Iterator<E> {
private final Predicate<E> predicate;
public FiniteSupplier(final Predicate<E> predicate) {
this.predicate = predicate;
}
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
throw new UnsupportedOperationException("Not supported yet.");
}
#Override
public E next() {
throw new UnsupportedOperationException("Not supported yet.");
}
}
I want to be able to call FiniteSupplier with a predicate, however now I do not really know how to implement the other requirements I have managed to extract. I understand it could be done by extending the FiniteSupplier and making it abstract, but is that the correct way to do it?

The method test(int/Integer) can be used as Predicate<Integer> and as IntPredicate. The compiler does the conversion:
IntPredicate ip = (i) -> i>0;
Predicate<Integer> pi = (i) -> i>0;
Predicate<Integer> ip2pi = ip::test;
IntPredicate pi2ip = pi::test;
But you can't cast the two types as they are not assignable. IntPredicate does not extend Predicate.
So just use ::test when you create FibSupplier:
new FibSupplier(p) => new FibSupplier(p::test)
Or do that in a constructor. I'd introduce a new abstract type FiniteIntSupplier with an extra constructor that takes an IntSupplier and converts it to a general Supplier:
public FiniteIntSupplier(IntPredicate p) {
this(p::test);
}

Java Iterator for primitive types

I have a Java class of the following form:
class Example {
private byte[][] data;
public Example(int s) { data = new byte[s][s]; }
public byte getter(int x, int y) { return byte[x][y]; }
public void setter(int x, int y, byte z) { byte[x][y] = z; }
}
I would like to be able to externally iterate over the private data using an iterator like so:
for(byte b : Example) { ;/* do stuff */ }
I tried to implement a private Iterator class but I ran into problems:
private class ExampleIterator implements Iterator {
private int curr_x;
private int curr_y;
public ExampleIterator() { curr_x=0; curr_y=-1; }
public boolean hasNext() {
return curr_x != field.length-1
&& curr_y != field.length-1; //is not the last cell?
}
public byte next() { // <-- Error is here:
// Wants to change return type to Object
// Won't compile!
if(curr_y=field.length) { ++curr_x; curr_y=0; }
return field[curr_x][curr_y];
}
public void remove() { ; } //does nothing
}
How would I implement an external iterator for primitive types (not generics)? Is this possible in Java?

Java 8 introduced primitive iterators, that allow you to avoid boxing/unboxing during iteration over int, long and double collections.
You can create you own PrimitiveIterator of byte with typesafely implementing generic PrimitiveIterator<Byte,ByteConsumer>. ByteConsumer is also to be implemented. Both are pretty straightforward.
Why is there no PrimitiveIterator.ofByte in jdk? Probably because of machine word size, that is usually not smaller than int. Or byte iterators are better done by streams and such.

An iterator cannot yield values of a primitive type. However, it could yield values of the wrapper type Byte. Such values can be auto-unboxed into byte (as long as they are not null).
private class ExampleIterator implements Iterator<Byte> {
public boolean hasNext() { ... }
public Byte next() { ... }
}
Then you can use it like so:
for (byte b : example) { ... }

You can't use generics with primitives, as the generics require a class for the type.
What you can do is iterate over the Wrapper types (Integer, Byte, Boolean, etc)...

Implement Iterable, and return a Byte object instead of a byte primitive:
class Example implements Iterable<Byte> {
..
public Iterator<Byte> iterator() {
return new MyIterator();
}
private class MyIterator implements Iterator<Byte> {
public Byte next() {...}
....
}
}
Implementing Iterable instead of Iterator allows you to loop on the object items directly, using the for-each loop.

If you want your iterator to implement java.util.Iterator then next() will have to return Byte
class ByteArrayIterator implements Iterator<Byte> {
final byte[] a;
int i = 0;
ByteArrayIterator(byte[] a) {
this.a = a;
}
public boolean hasNext() {
return i < a.length;
}
public Byte next() {
if (i == a.length) {
throw new NoSuchElementException();
}
return a[i++];
}
public void remove() {
throw new UnsupportedOperationException();
}
}
remove can be implemented too. If you dont need it implemnent Iterator then we can change next() to return byte
class ByteArrayIterator {
...
public byte next() {
if (i == a.length) {
throw new NoSuchElementException();
}
return a[i++];
}

Real time sorted by value, auto-discarding, bounded collection ?

I spent some time to try to make a collection that:
1) is sorted by value (not by key)
2) is sorted each time an element is added or modified
3) is fixed size and discard automatically smallest/biggest element depending of the sort way
4) is safe thread
So 3) and 4) I think it is quite ok. For 1) and 2) it was a bit more tricky. I spent quite a long time on this thread, experimenting the different sample, but one big issue is that the collection are sorted only once when object are inserted.
Anyway, I try to implement my own collection, which is working (shouldn't be used for huge data as it is sorted quite often) but I'm not so happy with the design. Especially in the fact that my value objects are constrained to be Observable (which is good) but not comparable so I had to use a dirty instanceof + exception for this.
Any sugestion to improve this ?
Here is the code:
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Collections;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.Observable;
import java.util.Observer;
public class SortedDiscardingSyncArray<K, V extends Observable> implements Observer {
// Comparison way (ascendent or descendant)
public static enum ComparisonWay
{
DESC,
ASC;
}
// this is backed by a List (and ArrayList impl)
private List<ArrayElement> array;
// Capacity, configurable, over this limit, an item will be discarded
private int MAX_CAPACITY = 200;
// default is descending comparison
private ComparisonWay compareWay = ComparisonWay.DESC;
public SortedDiscardingSyncArray(ComparisonWay compareWay, int mAX_CAPACITY) {
super();
this.compareWay = compareWay;
MAX_CAPACITY = mAX_CAPACITY;
array = new ArrayList <ArrayElement>(MAX_CAPACITY);
}
public SortedDiscardingSyncArray(int mAX_CAPACITY) {
super();
MAX_CAPACITY = mAX_CAPACITY;
array = new ArrayList<ArrayElement>(MAX_CAPACITY);
}
public SortedDiscardingSyncArray() {
super();
array = new ArrayList <ArrayElement>(MAX_CAPACITY);
}
public boolean put(K key, V value)
{
try {
return put (new ArrayElement(key, value, this));
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
return false;
}
finally
{
sortArray();
}
}
private synchronized boolean put(ArrayElement ae)
{
if (array.size() < MAX_CAPACITY)
{
return array.add(ae);
}
// check if last one is greater/smaller than current value to insert
else if (ae.compareTo(array.get(MAX_CAPACITY-1)) < 0)
{
array.remove(MAX_CAPACITY - 1);
return array.add(ae);
}
// else we don't insert
return false;
}
public V getValue (int index)
{
return array.get(index).getValue();
}
public V getValue (K key)
{
for (ArrayElement ae : array)
{
if (ae.getKey().equals(key)) return ae.getValue();
}
return null;
}
public K getKey (int index)
{
return array.get(index).getKey();
}
private void sortArray()
{
Collections.sort(array);
}
public synchronized void setValue(K key, V newValue) {
for (ArrayElement ae : array)
{
if (ae.getKey().equals(key))
{
ae.setValue(newValue);
return;
}
}
}
public int size() {
return array.size();
}
#Override
public void update(java.util.Observable arg0, Object arg1) {
sortArray();
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
// some test on the class
SortedDiscardingSyncArray<String, ObservableSample> myData = new SortedDiscardingSyncArray<String, ObservableSample>(ComparisonWay.DESC, 20);
String Ka = "Ka";
String Kb = "Kb";
String Kc = "Kc";
String Kd = "Kd";
myData.put(Ka, new ObservableSample(0));
myData.put(Kb, new ObservableSample(3));
myData.put(Kc, new ObservableSample(1));
myData.put(Kd, new ObservableSample(2));
for (int i=0; i < myData.size(); i++)
{
System.out.println(myData.getKey(i).toString() + " - " + myData.getValue(i).toString());
}
System.out.println("Modifying data...");
myData.getValue(Kb).setValue(12);
myData.getValue(Ka).setValue(34);
myData.getValue(Kd).setValue(9);
myData.getValue(Kc).setValue(19);
for (int i=0; i < myData.size(); i++)
{
System.out.println(myData.getKey(i).toString() + " - " + myData.getValue(i).toString());
}
}
private class ArrayElement implements Comparable <ArrayElement> {
public ArrayElement(K key, V value, Observer obs) throws Exception {
super();
// don't know how to handle that case
// maybe multiple inheritance would have helped here ?
if (! (value instanceof Comparable)) throw new Exception("Object must be 'Comparable'");
this.key = key;
this.value = value;
value.addObserver(obs);
}
public String toString()
{
StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer();
sb.append(key);
sb.append(" - ");
sb.append(value);
return sb.toString();
}
private K key;
private V value;
public K getKey() {
return key;
}
public V getValue() {
return value;
}
public synchronized void setValue(V value) {
this.value = value;
}
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
#Override
public int compareTo(ArrayElement o) {
int c;
if (compareWay == ComparisonWay.DESC) c = ((Comparable<V>) o.getValue()).compareTo(this.getValue());
else c = ((Comparable<V>) this.getValue()).compareTo(o.getValue());
if (c != 0) {
return c;
}
Integer hashCode1 = o.getValue().hashCode();
Integer hashCode2 = this.getValue().hashCode();
// we don't check the compare way for hash code (useless ?)
return hashCode1.compareTo(hashCode2);
}
}
}
And the other class for testing purpose:
import java.util.Observable;
public class ObservableSample extends Observable implements Comparable <ObservableSample>
{
private Integer value = 0;
public ObservableSample(int value) {
this.value = value;
setChanged();
notifyObservers();
}
public String toString()
{
return String.valueOf(this.value);
}
public void setValue(Integer value) {
this.value = value;
setChanged();
notifyObservers();
}
public Integer getValue() {
return value;
}
#Override
public int compareTo(ObservableSample o) {
int c;
c = (this.getValue()).compareTo(o.getValue());
if (c != 0) {
return c;
}
Integer hashCode1 = o.getValue().hashCode();
Integer hashCode2 = this.getValue().hashCode();
// we don't check the compare way for hash code (useless ?)
return hashCode1.compareTo(hashCode2);
}
}

Collections are difficult to write, maybe you should look for an existing implementation.
Try checking out ImmutableSortedSet from Guava.

You can have a marker interface
public interface ComparableObservable extends Observable, Comparable {
}
and then change
SortedDiscardingSyncArray<K, V extends Observable>
to
SortedDiscardingSyncArray<K, V extends ComparableObservable>
to avoid the explicit cast.
Other than that the code is quite verbose and I didn't follow it completely. I would also suggest having a look at guava or (apache) commons-collections library to explore if you can find something reusable.

You can write generic wildcards with multiple bounds. So change your declaration of <K, V extends Observable> to <K, V extends Observable & Comparable<V>> and then you can treat V as if it implements both interfaces, without an otherwise empty and useless interface.
Another few things: Pick a naming convention, and stick with it. The one I use is that a name such as MAX_CAPACITY would be used for a static final field (i.e. a constant, such as a default) and that the equivalent instance field would be maxCapacity Names such as mAX_CAPACITY would be right out of the question.
See: Oracle's naming conventions for Java
Instead of using a ComparisonWay enum, I would take a custom Comparator. Much more flexible, and doesn't replicate something that already exists.
See: the Comparator API docs
Your code, as written, is not thread safe. In particular an observed element calling the unsynchronized update method may thus invoke sortArray without obtaining the proper lock. FindBugs is a great tool that catches a lot of problems like this.
Your ObservableSample does not really follow good practices with regards to how it implements Comparable, in that it does not really compare data values but instead the hashCode. The hashCode is essentially arbitrary and collisions are quite possible. Additionally, the Comparable interface requests that usually you should be "consistent with Equals", for which you also might want to take a look at the documentation for the Object class's equals method
Yes, it sounds like a lot of work, but if you go through it and do it right you will save yourself astounding amounts of debugging effort down the road. If you do not do these properly and to the spec, you will find that when you place it in Sets or Maps your keys or values strangely disappear, reappear, or get clobbered. And it will depend on which version of Java you run, potentially!

Here is a version updated. Still not completly sure it is safe thread but findbugs tool didn't give so usefull tips. Also for the comparisonWay, I don't want to constraint the user to develop its own comparator, I want to keep the things simple.
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Collections;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.Observable;
import java.util.Observer;
public class SortedDiscardingSyncArray<K, V extends Observable & Comparable<V>> implements Observer {
// Comparison way (ascendent or descendant)
public static enum ComparisonWay { DESC, ASC; }
// this is backed by a List (and ArrayList)
private List<ArrayElement> array;
// Capacity, configurable, over this limit, an item will be discarded
private int maxCapacity = 200;
// default is descending comparison
private ComparisonWay compareWay = ComparisonWay.DESC;
public SortedDiscardingSyncArray(ComparisonWay compareWay, int maxCapacity) {
super();
this.compareWay = compareWay;
this.maxCapacity = maxCapacity;
array = new ArrayList <ArrayElement>(maxCapacity);
}
public SortedDiscardingSyncArray(int maxCapacity) {
super();
this.maxCapacity = maxCapacity;
array = new ArrayList<ArrayElement>(maxCapacity);
}
public SortedDiscardingSyncArray() {
super();
array = new ArrayList <ArrayElement>(maxCapacity);
}
// not synchronized, but calling internal sync put command
public boolean put(K key, V value)
{
try {
return put (new ArrayElement(key, value, this));
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
return false;
}
finally
{
sortArray();
}
}
private synchronized boolean put(ArrayElement ae)
{
if (array.size() < maxCapacity) return array.add(ae);
// check if last one is greater/smaller than current value to insert
else if (ae.compareTo(array.get(maxCapacity-1)) < 0)
{
array.remove(maxCapacity - 1);
return array.add(ae);
}
// else we don't insert and return false
return false;
}
public V getValue (int index)
{
return array.get(index).getValue();
}
public V getValue (K key)
{
for (ArrayElement ae : array)
{
if (ae.getKey().equals(key)) return ae.getValue();
}
return null;
}
public K getKey (int index)
{
return array.get(index).getKey();
}
private synchronized void sortArray()
{
Collections.sort(array);
}
public synchronized void setValue(K key, V newValue) {
for (ArrayElement ae : array)
{
if (ae.getKey().equals(key))
{
ae.setValue(newValue);
return;
}
}
}
public int size() {
return array.size();
}
#Override
public void update(java.util.Observable arg0, Object arg1) {
sortArray();
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
// some test on the class
SortedDiscardingSyncArray<String, ObservableSample> myData = new SortedDiscardingSyncArray<String, ObservableSample>(ComparisonWay.DESC, 20);
String Ka = "Ka";
String Kb = "Kb";
String Kc = "Kc";
String Kd = "Kd";
myData.put(Ka, new ObservableSample(0));
myData.put(Kb, new ObservableSample(3));
myData.put(Kc, new ObservableSample(1));
myData.put(Kd, new ObservableSample(2));
for (int i=0; i < myData.size(); i++)
{
System.out.println(myData.getKey(i).toString() + " - " + myData.getValue(i).toString());
}
System.out.println("Modifying data...");
myData.getValue(Kb).setValue(12);
myData.getValue(Ka).setValue(34);
myData.getValue(Kd).setValue(9);
myData.getValue(Kc).setValue(19);
for (int i=0; i < myData.size(); i++)
{
System.out.println(myData.getKey(i).toString() + " - " + myData.getValue(i).toString());
}
}
private class ArrayElement implements Comparable <ArrayElement> {
public ArrayElement(K key, V value, Observer obs) throws Exception {
super();
this.key = key;
this.value = value;
value.addObserver(obs);
}
public String toString()
{
StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer();
sb.append(key);
sb.append(" - ");
sb.append(value);
return sb.toString();
}
private K key;
private V value;
public K getKey() {
return key;
}
public V getValue() {
return value;
}
public synchronized void setValue(V value) {
this.value = value;
}
#Override
public int compareTo(ArrayElement o) {
int c;
if (compareWay == ComparisonWay.DESC) c = o.getValue().compareTo(this.getValue());
else c = this.getValue().compareTo(o.getValue());
if (c != 0) {
return c;
}
Integer hashCode1 = o.getValue().hashCode();
Integer hashCode2 = this.getValue().hashCode();
// we don't check the compare way for hash code (useless ?)
return hashCode1.compareTo(hashCode2);
}
}
}

How to iterate through SparseArray?

Is there a way to iterate over Java SparseArray (for Android) ? I used sparsearray to easily get values by index. I could not find one.

Seems I found the solution. I hadn't properly noticed the keyAt(index) function.
So I'll go with something like this:
for(int i = 0; i < sparseArray.size(); i++) {
int key = sparseArray.keyAt(i);
// get the object by the key.
Object obj = sparseArray.get(key);
}

If you don't care about the keys, then valueAt(int) can be used to while iterating through the sparse array to access the values directly.
for(int i = 0, nsize = sparseArray.size(); i < nsize; i++) {
Object obj = sparseArray.valueAt(i);
}

Ooor you just create your own ListIterator:
public final class SparseArrayIterator<E> implements ListIterator<E> {
private final SparseArray<E> array;
private int cursor;
private boolean cursorNowhere;
/**
* #param array
* to iterate over.
* #return A ListIterator on the elements of the SparseArray. The elements
* are iterated in the same order as they occur in the SparseArray.
* {#link #nextIndex()} and {#link #previousIndex()} return a
* SparseArray key, not an index! To get the index, call
* {#link android.util.SparseArray#indexOfKey(int)}.
*/
public static <E> ListIterator<E> iterate(SparseArray<E> array) {
return iterateAt(array, -1);
}
/**
* #param array
* to iterate over.
* #param key
* to start the iteration at. {#link android.util.SparseArray#indexOfKey(int)}
* < 0 results in the same call as {#link #iterate(android.util.SparseArray)}.
* #return A ListIterator on the elements of the SparseArray. The elements
* are iterated in the same order as they occur in the SparseArray.
* {#link #nextIndex()} and {#link #previousIndex()} return a
* SparseArray key, not an index! To get the index, call
* {#link android.util.SparseArray#indexOfKey(int)}.
*/
public static <E> ListIterator<E> iterateAtKey(SparseArray<E> array, int key) {
return iterateAt(array, array.indexOfKey(key));
}
/**
* #param array
* to iterate over.
* #param location
* to start the iteration at. Value < 0 results in the same call
* as {#link #iterate(android.util.SparseArray)}. Value >
* {#link android.util.SparseArray#size()} set to that size.
* #return A ListIterator on the elements of the SparseArray. The elements
* are iterated in the same order as they occur in the SparseArray.
* {#link #nextIndex()} and {#link #previousIndex()} return a
* SparseArray key, not an index! To get the index, call
* {#link android.util.SparseArray#indexOfKey(int)}.
*/
public static <E> ListIterator<E> iterateAt(SparseArray<E> array, int location) {
return new SparseArrayIterator<E>(array, location);
}
private SparseArrayIterator(SparseArray<E> array, int location) {
this.array = array;
if (location < 0) {
cursor = -1;
cursorNowhere = true;
} else if (location < array.size()) {
cursor = location;
cursorNowhere = false;
} else {
cursor = array.size() - 1;
cursorNowhere = true;
}
}
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
return cursor < array.size() - 1;
}
#Override
public boolean hasPrevious() {
return cursorNowhere && cursor >= 0 || cursor > 0;
}
#Override
public int nextIndex() {
if (hasNext()) {
return array.keyAt(cursor + 1);
} else {
throw new NoSuchElementException();
}
}
#Override
public int previousIndex() {
if (hasPrevious()) {
if (cursorNowhere) {
return array.keyAt(cursor);
} else {
return array.keyAt(cursor - 1);
}
} else {
throw new NoSuchElementException();
}
}
#Override
public E next() {
if (hasNext()) {
if (cursorNowhere) {
cursorNowhere = false;
}
cursor++;
return array.valueAt(cursor);
} else {
throw new NoSuchElementException();
}
}
#Override
public E previous() {
if (hasPrevious()) {
if (cursorNowhere) {
cursorNowhere = false;
} else {
cursor--;
}
return array.valueAt(cursor);
} else {
throw new NoSuchElementException();
}
}
#Override
public void add(E object) {
throw new UnsupportedOperationException();
}
#Override
public void remove() {
if (!cursorNowhere) {
array.remove(array.keyAt(cursor));
cursorNowhere = true;
cursor--;
} else {
throw new IllegalStateException();
}
}
#Override
public void set(E object) {
if (!cursorNowhere) {
array.setValueAt(cursor, object);
} else {
throw new IllegalStateException();
}
}
}

For whoever is using Kotlin, honestly the by far easiest way to iterate over a SparseArray is: Use the Kotlin extension from Anko or Android KTX! (credit to Yazazzello for pointing out Android KTX)
Simply call forEach { i, item -> }

Simple as Pie. Just make sure you fetch array size before actually performing the loop.
for(int i = 0, arraySize= mySparseArray.size(); i < arraySize; i++) {
Object obj = mySparseArray.get(/* int key = */ mySparseArray.keyAt(i));
}
Hope this helps.

For removing all the elements from SparseArray using the above looping leads to Exception.
To avoid this Follow the below code to remove all the elements from SparseArray using normal loops
private void getValues(){
for(int i=0; i<sparseArray.size(); i++){
int key = sparseArray.keyAt(i);
Log.d("Element at "+key, " is "+sparseArray.get(key));
sparseArray.remove(key);
i=-1;
}
}

Here is simple Iterator<T> and Iterable<T> implementations for SparseArray<T>:
public class SparseArrayIterator<T> implements Iterator<T> {
private final SparseArray<T> array;
private int index;
public SparseArrayIterator(SparseArray<T> array) {
this.array = array;
}
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
return array.size() > index;
}
#Override
public T next() {
return array.valueAt(index++);
}
#Override
public void remove() {
array.removeAt(index);
}
}
public class SparseArrayIterable<T> implements Iterable<T> {
private final SparseArray<T> sparseArray;
public SparseArrayIterable(SparseArray<T> sparseArray) {
this.sparseArray = sparseArray;
}
#Override
public Iterator<T> iterator() {
return new SparseArrayIterator<>(sparseArray);
}
}
If you want to iterate not only a value but also a key:
public class SparseKeyValue<T> {
private final int key;
private final T value;
public SparseKeyValue(int key, T value) {
this.key = key;
this.value = value;
}
public int getKey() {
return key;
}
public T getValue() {
return value;
}
}
public class SparseArrayKeyValueIterator<T> implements Iterator<SparseKeyValue<T>> {
private final SparseArray<T> array;
private int index;
public SparseArrayKeyValueIterator(SparseArray<T> array) {
this.array = array;
}
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
return array.size() > index;
}
#Override
public SparseKeyValue<T> next() {
SparseKeyValue<T> keyValue = new SparseKeyValue<>(array.keyAt(index), array.valueAt(index));
index++;
return keyValue;
}
#Override
public void remove() {
array.removeAt(index);
}
}
public class SparseArrayKeyValueIterable<T> implements Iterable<SparseKeyValue<T>> {
private final SparseArray<T> sparseArray;
public SparseArrayKeyValueIterable(SparseArray<T> sparseArray) {
this.sparseArray = sparseArray;
}
#Override
public Iterator<SparseKeyValue<T>> iterator() {
return new SparseArrayKeyValueIterator<T>(sparseArray);
}
}
It's useful to create utility methods that return Iterable<T> and Iterable<SparseKeyValue<T>>:
public abstract class SparseArrayUtils {
public static <T> Iterable<SparseKeyValue<T>> keyValueIterable(SparseArray<T> sparseArray) {
return new SparseArrayKeyValueIterable<>(sparseArray);
}
public static <T> Iterable<T> iterable(SparseArray<T> sparseArray) {
return new SparseArrayIterable<>(sparseArray);
}
}
Now you can iterate SparseArray<T>:
SparseArray<String> a = ...;
for (String s: SparseArrayUtils.iterable(a)) {
// ...
}
for (SparseKeyValue<String> s: SparseArrayUtils.keyValueIterable(a)) {
// ...
}

If you use Kotlin, you can use extension functions as such, for example:
fun <T> LongSparseArray<T>.valuesIterator(): Iterator<T> {
val nSize = this.size()
return object : Iterator<T> {
var i = 0
override fun hasNext(): Boolean = i < nSize
override fun next(): T = valueAt(i++)
}
}
fun <T> LongSparseArray<T>.keysIterator(): Iterator<Long> {
val nSize = this.size()
return object : Iterator<Long> {
var i = 0
override fun hasNext(): Boolean = i < nSize
override fun next(): Long = keyAt(i++)
}
}
fun <T> LongSparseArray<T>.entriesIterator(): Iterator<Pair<Long, T>> {
val nSize = this.size()
return object : Iterator<Pair<Long, T>> {
var i = 0
override fun hasNext(): Boolean = i < nSize
override fun next() = Pair(keyAt(i), valueAt(i++))
}
}
You can also convert to a list, if you wish. Example:
sparseArray.keysIterator().asSequence().toList()
I think it might even be safe to delete items using remove on the LongSparseArray itself (not on the iterator), as it is in ascending order.
EDIT: Seems there is even an easier way, by using collection-ktx (example here) . It's implemented in a very similar way to what I wrote, actally.
Gradle requires this:
implementation 'androidx.core:core-ktx:#'
implementation 'androidx.collection:collection-ktx:#'
Here's the usage for LongSparseArray :
val sparse= LongSparseArray<String>()
for (key in sparse.keyIterator()) {
}
for (value in sparse.valueIterator()) {
}
sparse.forEach { key, value ->
}
And for those that use Java, you can use LongSparseArrayKt.keyIterator , LongSparseArrayKt.valueIterator and LongSparseArrayKt.forEach , for example. Same for the other cases.

The answer is no because SparseArray doesn't provide it. As pst put it, this thing doesn't provide any interfaces.
You could loop from 0 - size() and skip values that return null, but that is about it.
As I state in my comment, if you need to iterate use a Map instead of a SparseArray. For example, use a TreeMap which iterates in order by the key.
TreeMap<Integer, MyType>

The accepted answer has some holes in it. The beauty of the SparseArray is that it allows gaps in the indeces. So, we could have two maps like so, in a SparseArray...
(0,true)
(250,true)
Notice the size here would be 2. If we iterate over size, we will only get values for the values mapped to index 0 and index 1. So the mapping with a key of 250 is not accessed.
for(int i = 0; i < sparseArray.size(); i++) {
int key = sparseArray.keyAt(i);
// get the object by the key.
Object obj = sparseArray.get(key);
}
The best way to do this is to iterate over the size of your data set, then check those indeces with a get() on the array. Here is an example with an adapter where I am allowing batch delete of items.
for (int index = 0; index < mAdapter.getItemCount(); index++) {
if (toDelete.get(index) == true) {
long idOfItemToDelete = (allItems.get(index).getId());
mDbManager.markItemForDeletion(idOfItemToDelete);
}
}
I think ideally the SparseArray family would have a getKeys() method, but alas it does not.

round robin scheduling java iterators

I have a list of hosts in an array which represnt the servers available to do a particular job. Currently I simply iterate thru the list looking and establish comms with a host to check its not busy. If not I will send a job to it. This approach tends to mean that the first host in the list tends to get hot constanly with the load not balanced properly with the rest of the available hosts.
in pseudocode ..
for (Host h : hosts) {
//checkstatus
if status == job accepted break;
}
I'd like to balance this load properly between the hosts i.e first time host one is used 2nd time the method is used host 2. Just wondering that the most elegant solution to this is ??
Thanks
W

Google collections has a utility method Iterators.cycle(Iterable<T> iterable) that does what you want.

You can create a new kind of Iterable that provides round-robin iteration:
public class RoundRobin<T> implements Iterable<T> {
private List<T> coll;
public RoundRobin(List<T> coll) { this.coll = coll; }
public Iterator<T> iterator() {
return new Iterator<T>() {
private int index = 0;
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
return true;
}
#Override
public T next() {
T res = coll.get(index);
index = (index + 1) % coll.size();
return res;
}
#Override
public void remove() {
throw new UnsupportedOperationException();
}
};
}
}
You need to define your hosts as RoundRobin<Host>.
[FIXED based on Mirko's comment]

If the list is mutable and the cost of editing it is negligible compared to I/O with the hosts, you can just rotate it:
List<String> list = Arrays.asList("one", "two", "three");
Collections.rotate(list, -1);
System.out.println(list);

IMHO the standard Java API already provides an easy way to accomplish this, without resorting to external libraries or even the need to implement a custom Iterator. Simply use a Deque where you'd pull the first server, use or discard it, then append it back to the end of the Deque. Here's some sample code:
// Initialize the Deque. This might be at your class constructor.
Deque<Host> dq = new ArrayDeque<Host>();
dq.addAll(Arrays.asList(hosts));
void sendJob(Job myJob) {
boolean jobInProcess = false;
do {
Host host = dq.removeFirst(); // Remove the host from the top
if(!host.isBusy()) {
host.sendJob(myJob);
jobInProcess = true;
}
dq.addLast(host); // Put the host back at the end
}
while(!jobInProcess); // Might add another condition to prevent an infinite loop...
}
This is just a sample where you always ping hosts in round robin order in a loop that only ends when one of them is available and takes the job. You could tinker with it easily to go only around the queue once (use a counter with a max set to the queue's size) or a number of times beofre throwing an exception, or sleeping in between rounds to avoid banging the hosts when all are busy.

My RoundRobin implementation, based upon the implementation of https://stackoverflow.com/a/2041772/1268954
/**
*
* #author Mirko Schulze
*
* #param <T>
*/
public class RoundRobin<T> implements Iterable<T> {
private final List<T> coll;
public RoundRobin(final List<T> coll) {
this.coll = NullCheck.throwExceptionIfNull(coll, "collection is null");
}
#Override
public Iterator<T> iterator() {
return new Iterator<T>() {
private int index;
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
return true;
}
#Override
public T next() {
this.index = this.index % RoundRobin.this.coll.size();
final T t = RoundRobin.this.coll.get(this.index);
this.index++;
return t;
}
#Override
public void remove() {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("remove not allowd");
}
};
}
}
And the Junit TestCase
/**
*
* #author Mirko Schulze
*
*/
#RunWith(JUnit4.class)
public class RoundRobinTest extends TestCase {
private List<Integer> getCollection() {
final List<Integer> retval = new Vector<Integer>();
retval.add(Integer.valueOf(1));
retval.add(Integer.valueOf(2));
retval.add(Integer.valueOf(3));
retval.add(Integer.valueOf(4));
retval.add(Integer.valueOf(5));
return retval;
}
#Test
public void testIteration() {
final List<Integer> l = this.getCollection();
final Integer frst = l.get(0);
final Integer scnd = l.get(1);
final Integer thrd = l.get(2);
final Integer frth = l.get(3);
final Integer last = l.get(4);
Assert.assertEquals("die Collection hat für diesen Test nicht die passende Größe!", 5, l.size());
final RoundRobin<Integer> rr = new RoundRobin<Integer>(l);
final Iterator<Integer> i = rr.iterator();
for (int collectionIterations = 0; collectionIterations < 4; collectionIterations++) {
final Integer i1 = i.next();
Assert.assertEquals("nicht das erste Element", frst, i1);
final Integer i2 = i.next();
Assert.assertEquals("nicht das zweite Element", scnd, i2);
final Integer i3 = i.next();
Assert.assertEquals("nicht das dritte Element", thrd, i3);
final Integer i4 = i.next();
Assert.assertEquals("nicht das vierte Element", frth, i4);
final Integer i5 = i.next();
Assert.assertEquals("nicht das letzte Element", last, i5);
}
}
}

The implementations provided are buggy and might fail in case of parallelism , the easiest way i did it was to use a circular linked list whose pointer is maintained by an atomic integer.

If you are creating an Iterator, best to create a defensive copy first and have the iterator work on that.
return new MyIterator(ImmutableList.<T>copyOf(list));

public class RoundRobinIterator<T> implements Serializable {
private static final long serialVersionUID = -2472203060894189676L;
//
private List<T> list;
private Iterator<T> it;
private AtomicInteger index = new AtomicInteger(0);
public RoundRobinIterator(List<T> list) throws NullPointerException {
super();
if (list==null) {
throw new NullPointerException("List is null");
}
this.list=Collections.unmodifiableList(list);
}
public RoundRobinIterator(Collection<T> values) {
this(new ArrayList<T>(values));
}
public RoundRobinIterator(Iterator<T> values) {
this(copyIterator(values));
}
public RoundRobinIterator(Enumeration<T> values) {
this(Collections.list(values));
}
private final List<T> getList() {
return list;
}
private final Iterator<T> getIt() {
return it;
}
public final int size() {
return list.size();
}
public final synchronized T getNext(Filter<T> filter) {
int start = index.get();
T t = getNext();
T result = null;
while ((result==null) && (start!=getIndex())) {
if (filter.accept(t)) {
result=t;
} else {
t = getNext();
}
}
return result;
}
public final synchronized T getNext() {
if (getIt()==null) {
if (getList().size()==0) {
index.set(0);
return null;
} else {
it = getList().iterator();
index.set(0);
return it.next();
}
} else if (it.hasNext()) {
index.incrementAndGet();
return it.next();
} else {
if (list.size()==0) {
index.set(0);
return null;
} else {
index.set(0);
it = list.iterator();
return it.next();
}
}
}
public final synchronized int getIndex() {
return index.get();
}
private static <T> List<T> copyIterator(Iterator<T> iter) {
List<T> copy = new ArrayList<T>();
while (iter.hasNext()) {
copy.add(iter.next());
}
return copy;
}
}
Where Filter is
public interface Filter<T> {
public boolean accept(T t);
}