Develop Reference

Add null-like value to String in Java

I am writing test method like setTask(Task task). And Task object has several fields, e.g.
public String vehicle;
Method setTask should be used in different test-cases, so I'd like to have an options for this field to accept values:
null - the method should not do anything in this particulare case;
some string value - e.g. "", "Hello, World!", "Iso Isetta", ...
random - a value that indicates (as well as null indicates "no changes") that a random value should be selected for a drop-down list corresponding to this field.
So what can I do to make String to be SpecialString which could accept values null, random & some string value? (BTW: I don't want to set it to string value "RANDOM", and chech whether the value is equal to "RANDOM"-string)
UPDATE: I don't mean random like random value from a set of values, I mean random as well as null and this is for setTask() to handle random (select random from drop-down), and not to pass a random string from a set of values.
Pseudocode:
Task task = new Task();
task.vehicle = random; // as well as null
setTask(task)
in setTask(Task task):
if (task.vehicle == null) {
//skip
} else if (task.vehicle == random) {
// get possible values from drop-down list
// select one of them
} else {
// select value from drop-down list which is equal to task.vehicle
}

Don't assign a fixed String but use a Supplier<String> which can generate a String dynamically:
public Supplier<String> vehicleSupplier;
This, you can assign a generator function as you request:
static Supplier<String> nullSupplier () { return () -> null; }
static Supplier<String> fixedValueSupplier (String value) { return () -> value; }
static Supplier<String> randomSupplier (String... values) {
int index = ThreadLocalRandom.current().nextInt(values.length) -1;
return index > 0 && index < values.length ? values[index] : null;
}
In use, this looks like:
task.setVehicleSupplier(nullSupplier()); // or
task.setVehicleSupplier(fixedValueSupplier("value")); // or
task.setVehicleSupplier(randomSupplier("", "Hello, World!", "Iso Isetta"));
and you can get the String by
String value = task.vehicleSupplier().get();
or hide the implementation in a getter function
class Task {
// ...
private Supplier<String> vehicleSupplier;
public void setVehicleSupplier(Supplier<String> s) {
vehicleSupplier = s;
}
public String getVehicle() {
return vehicleSupplier != null ? vehicleSupplier.get() : null;
}
// ...
}

What you may want to do is to create an object that wraps a string as well as some information about whether or not it's a special value. Something along the lines of...
public class Special<T> {
public enum Type {
NOTHING, RANDOM, SPECIFIC
}
private final Type type;
private final T specificValue;
public Special(Type type, T specificValue) {
this.type = type;
this.specificValue = specificValue;
}
public Type getType() {
return type;
}
public T getSpecificValue() {
if (type != SPECIFIC) {
throw new IllegalStateException("Value is not specific");
}
return specificValue;
}
}
The class above could be used like so:
Special<String> a = new Special<>(Special.Type.NOTHING, null);
Special<String> b = new Special<>(Special.Type.SPECIFIC, "Hello");
if (b.getType() == Special.Type.RANDOM) {
// do something
}else if (b.getType() == Special.Type.SPECIFIC) {
String val = b.getSpecificValue();
// do something else
}
A slightly more polished variant of the thing above is probably the best way, but there is a way, a much uglier way, to do it using nothing but a String field.
What you could do is to have a "magical" string instance that behaves differently from all other string instances, despite having the same value. This would be done by having something like
static final String SPECIAL_VALUE_RANDOM = new String("random");
Note the use of the String constructor, which ensures that the string becomes a unique, non-interned instance. You can then say if (vehicle == SPECIAL_VALUE_RANDOM) { ... } (note the use of == instead of .equals()) to check if that specific instance (rather than any other string that says "random") was used.
Again, this is not a particularly good way of doing this, especially if you intend to do this more than once ever. I would strongly suggest something closer to the first way.

SQL IN condition in Java

I have multiple conditions to check as shown below,
if(pouch.getStatus().equals("Finalized") || pouch.getStatus().equals("Ready")
|| pouch.getStatus().equals("Checkout") || pouch.getStatus().equals("Confirmed")
|| pouch.getStatus().equals("Book") || pouch.getStatus().equals("Started")
|| pouch.getStatus().equals("Inital") || pouch.getStatus().equals("Close")) {
// Body Implementation
}
Is there any easy way to check above conditions similar like SQL INcondition, so that code look simpler?

Let's take a look about SQL in features
SQL WHERE IN returns values that match values in a list
So I would use a collection, which implements from Collection<E> and had contains method, make the if statement simpler.
contains(Object o) Returns true if this set contains the specified element.
contains effect is very similar to SQL in.
1.add your multiple conditions in the collection, which implements from Collection<E>
Set<String> dict = new HashSet<String>();
dict.add("Finalized");
dict.add("Ready");
dict.add("Checkout");
dict.add("Confirmed");
dict.add("Book");
dict.add("Started");
dict.add("Inital");
dict.add("Close");
2.using contains to check input value whether exist in the collection.
if (dict.contains(pouch.getStatus()))
{
// do your logic
}

You can use the method matches which is available in String class,
if(pouch.getStatus().matches("Finalized|Ready|Checkout|Confirmed|Book|Started|Inital|Close")){
//your implementation goes here
}

List<String> listOfInputs = new ArrayList<String>();
// add elements in listOfInputs...
boolean isAvailable = listOfInputs.contains(pouch.getStatus());

SQL IN might return more than one result, but in your question, if one condition is satisfied the operation will terminate and return.
You can create an enum to hold all your conditions as shown below.
Assuming your Pouch class is this.
public class Pouch {
private final String status;
public Pouch(final String status) {
this.status = status;
}
public String getStatus() {
return status;
}
}
Here is your enum with the pouch status.
public enum PouchEnum {
Finalized, Ready, Checkout, Confirmed, Book, Started, Inital, Close
}
and check your condition as shown below.
if (PouchEnum.valueOf(pouch.getStatus()) != null) {
// Do some stuff
}
To make it cleaner you can use EnumUtils from apache commons-lang3 this make your code checking more cleaner as shown below.
if (EnumUtils.isValidEnum(PouchEnum.class, pouch.getStatus())) {
// Do some stuff
}
I hope this will help your code to be cleaner.

You can create custom function:
static boolean inCondition(String var, String... ins) {
for (String in : ins) {
if (in.equals(var)) return true;
}
return false;
}
and then use it in this way:
public static void main(String[] args) {
String pouch = "Ready";
if (inCondition(pouch, "Finalized", "Ready", "Checkout" ... )) {
// do something
}
}

Below snippet might help you.
String status = "COMPLETED";
List<String> statusList = new ArrayList<>(Arrays.asList("COMPLETED","INPROGRESS"));
if(statusList.contains(status)){
// do your stuff
}

Using Arrays.asList and then use contains might be the best way at least on my case.
if(Arrays.asList("Finalized", "Ready", "Checkout", "Confirmed",
"Book", "Started", "Inital", "Close").contains(pouch.getStatus())) {
// Body
}

I think if you use the "switch" conditional, the code reads better:
switch (pouch.getStatus()) {
case "Finalized":
case "Ready":
case "Checkout":
case "Confirmed":
case "Book":
case "Started":
case "Inital":
case "Close":
// your code
break;
}

For this particular scenario, I think it's a good candidate for a simple enum like this:
public enum PouchStatus {
FINALIZED, READY, CHECKOUT, CONFIRMED, BOOK, STARTED, INITIAL, CLOSE
}
Usage:
if(PouchStatus.valueOf(pouch.getStatus().toUpperCase()) != null) {
}
You can also move this string sanitizing logic inside a static method in the enum, which would look like this:
public enum PouchStatus {
FINALIZED, READY, CHECKOUT, CONFIRMED, BOOK, STARTED, INITIAL, CLOSE
public static PouchStatus fromDescription(String desc) {
return Arrays.stream(PouchStatus.values()).filter(e -> e.name().equalsIgnoreCase(desc)).findFirst().orElse(null);
}
}
Usage:
if (PouchStatus.fromDescription(pouch.getStatus()) != null) {
}
As a final note, if the Pouch object comes from ORM (e.g.: hibernate/jpa) you can just map these values to the according enum elements right in the entity mapping (pouc.getStatus() would already return a PouchStatus object instead of a String).

Here is full example
public class InConditionJava {
public static void main(String[] args) {
// TODO Auto-generated method stub
String[] arr = { "Finalized", "Ready", "Checkout" };
checkData(arr);
}
private static void checkData(String[] arr) {
Set<String> names = new HashSet<String>(Arrays.asList(arr));
System.out.println("AS Checkout is there in our arr is should return True>>" + names.contains("Checkout")); // true
System.out.println(names.contains("Book")); // false
}
}

Here is another way of initializing List in one line with all statuses, and then checking if the list contains the given status.
// Java 9 way of initializing List with one line
List<String> statuses = List.of("Finalized", "Ready", "Checkout", "Confirmed",
"Book", "Started", "Inital", "Close");
if (statuses.contains(pouch.getStatus())) {
// Body
}

You can create an array of all status, then check if pouch.getStatus() in in that list or not?
public String[] statusArray = new String[]{ "Finalized", "Ready","Checkout","Confirmed", "Book", "Started", "Inital", "Close"};
if( Arrays.asList(statusArray).contains(pouch.getStatus())){
//do something
}

There are already plenty of options here, but you could also use Stream for this task, if the version of the JDK you are using is >= 8:
String status = pouch.getStatus();
if (Stream.of(
"Finalized",
"Ready",
"Checkout",
"Confirmed",
"Book",
"Started",
"Inital",
"Close")
.anyMatch(status::equals)) {
// Body
}
The downside of this method, compared to Collection#contains, is that you must make sure that pouch.getStatus() is not null, otherwise you will get a NullPointerException.

Check if properties have right values

I have a list of poperties defined in a config file, but before I proceed with further computations I would like to check if the properties have consistent values. Currently I am just doing via ifs.
private static void checkprops (Properties properties) throws Throwable {
if (!properties.getProperty("number").equals("one")
&& !properties.getProperty("number").equals("two")) {
throw new Exception("ERROR");
}
if (!properties.getProperty("check").equals("false")
&& !properties.getProperty("check").equals("true")) {
throw new Exception("ERROR");
}
if (properties.getProperty("totalnum").equals("null")) {
throw new Exception("ERROR");
}
}
Is there any way to do it somehow shorter and easier to read, since I have some properties that will have 5-6 different options.

First of all let me point out, that your code has an error:
if (properties.getProperty("totalnum").equals("null")) { ... }
If the property is not defined, getProperty() returns null, thus your code would raise a NullPointerException when trying to access equals(). It does not return a string with value "null". That's the case for all your lines.
I'd approach this using reflection, with a config class that declares public fields that might be annotated with value checks. A method will then set values on an instance of that config class, reading from the properties map.
Further reading:
What is reflection and why is it useful? (Stackoverflow)
Tutorial on Reflection (Oracle)
Article on Reflection (Oracle)
Tutorial on Annotations (Oracle)
The advantage of this is that the config shows the valid values in an intuitive, speaking format. The drawback is that the "unmarshalling" code is a bit complex. though this approach is quite powerful.
The config could look like this:
static class Config {
#RegExp("^(one|two)$")
public String number;
public Boolean check;
#Required #Range(min=1, max=6)
public Integer totalnum;
}
If a field is lacking the #Required annotation, a missing property does not result in an exception, thus the initialization value of Config is used.
Unmarshalling is done using this:
Config config = new Config();
setProperties(properties, config);
setProperties() will throw several exceptions when values are missing, have the wrong type or value. The exception can be catched and differentiated to display proper error messages.
In you application you can then access the config like simple objects:
if (config.totalnum == 3) {
// do something when totalnum is 3
}
This is the unmarshalling code:
private void setProperties(Properties properties, Props props) throws SecurityException, IllegalArgumentException, IllegalAccessException {
Class<?> clazz = props.getClass();
for (Field field : clazz.getDeclaredFields()) {
if ((field.getModifiers() & Modifier.PUBLIC) == 0) {
// ignore non-public properties
continue;
}
// the type of the field
Class<?> fieldType = field.getType();
// the field name of the class
String fieldName = field.getName();
// the raw value loaded from the .properties file
String value = properties.getProperty(fieldName);
// fields may be annotated with #Required
boolean required = (field.getAnnotation(Required.class) != null);
if (required && value == null) {
// field required but not defined in the properties, fail
throw new IllegalArgumentException(
String.format(
"Field %s is required",
fieldName
)
);
} else if (value == null) {
// ignore undefined field, default to class initialized value
continue;
}
// checks per type follow ...
if (fieldType == String.class) {
// fields may be annotated with RegExp to specify a matcher
RegExp regExp = field.getAnnotation(RegExp.class);
if (regExp != null && !Pattern.matches(regExp.value(), value)) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(
String.format(
"Value for field %s does not match %s: %s",
fieldName,
regExp.value(),
value
)
);
}
field.set(props, value);
} else if (fieldType == Integer.class) {
// may throw NumberFormatException if not a valid integer
Integer intValue = Integer.parseInt(value);
// fields may be annotated with Range to specify an integer range
Range range = field.getAnnotation(Range.class);
if (range != null && !(intValue >= range.min() && intValue <= range.max())) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(
String.format(
"Value for field %s out of range (%d..%d): %d",
fieldName,
range.min(),
range.max(),
intValue
)
);
}
field.set(props, intValue);
} else if (fieldType == Boolean.class) {
// strictly check valid boolean values
if (!Pattern.matches("^(true|false)$", value)) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(
String.format(
"Value for field %s is not a valid boolean (true|false): %s",
fieldName,
value
)
);
}
field.set(props, Boolean.parseBoolean(value));
}
}
}
Though already quite complex this code is rather simple. It does not handle other number types like Long or primitive types like int yet. These can be implemented using further if branches.
These are the annotations (defined in separate classes):
#Retention(RUNTIME)
#Target(FIELD)
public #interface Range {
public int min() default Integer.MIN_VALUE;
public int max() default Integer.MAX_VALUE;
}
#Retention(RUNTIME)
#Target(FIELD)
public #interface RegExp {
public String value() default "^.*$";
}
#Retention(RUNTIME)
#Target(FIELD)
public #interface Required {
}

You can create a utility method that would accept value from your configuration file and expected values as parameter and return a bool, for example:
public boolean validateProp(T propVal, T... expectedVals) {
for(T expectedVal : expectedVals) {
if(propVal == null) {
if(expectedVal == null) {
return true;
}
}
else if(propVal.equals(expectedVal)) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
A sample call in that case would be:
if(!validateProp(properties.getProperty("number"), "one", "two") {
throw new Exception("ERROR");
}

An option to avoid validating the Properties object directly is to map it to a POJO and then use Bean Validation on it.
Bean Validation is a standard Java API for specifying validation constraints and checking objects (or even method arguments) for validity, which relieves you from writing much of the code for modeling errors.
The reference implementation is Hibernate Validator but, despite the name, you can use it standalone without using all of Hibernate.
As an example (which might need some additional work):
public class Config {
#Pattern("^(one|two)$")
private String number;
#NotNull
private Boolean check;
#NotNull
#Min(1)
#Max(6)
private Integer totalnum;
public static Config fromProperties(Properties ps) {
Config conf = new Config();
conf.number = ps.getProperty("number");
// fails right away if "check" is null
conf.check = Boolean.valueOf(ps.getProperty("check"));
// fails right away if "totalnum" is null
conf.totalnum = Integer.valueOf(ps.getProperty("totalnum"));
return conf;
}
}
And the calling code:
Validator validator = Validation.buildDefaultValidatorFactory()
.getValidator();
Config config = Config.fromProperties(properties);
Set<ConstraintViolation<Config>> violations = validator.validate(config);
if (violations.isEmpty()) {
// good to go
} else {
// some code to print the errors
}
In the example, I'm using the #Pattern constraint to match using a regex but, since you mentioned some properties have 5-6 possible values, it might be better to define your own annotation like
#Values({"one", "two", "three", "four"})
private String number;

Suspicious call to Collection.contains method in ArrayList

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));

Does java have some convention to indicate that object is in empty state?

Of course, empty definition can differ. I'm used to PHP's empty though, which calls empty everything that evaluates to false. I'd like to call these things empty in my Java application:
null
String of zero length
0 Integer, Float or Double
false
Any array of zero length
Empty ArrayList or HashMap
Java has, for example, toString convention. Every object is granted to give you some string representation. In my Settings class I operate with HashMap<String, Object>. My empty method looks now like this:
public boolean empty(String name) {
Object val = settings.get(name);
if(val!=null) {
return false;
}
return true;
}
I'd like to extend it in a conventional manner, rather than if(val instanceof XXX) chain.

No, there is no standard convention for this in Java. Also, in Java there is no such thing as "evaluate to false" (except for booleans and Booleans, of course).
You will have to write a method (or rather, a series of overloaded methods for each type you need it for) which implements your notion of "empty". For example:
public static boolean isEmpty(String s) {
return (s == null) || (s.isEmpty());
}
public static boolean isEmpty(int i) {
return i == 0;
}
...

You could use overloading to describe all the "empty" objects:
public static boolean empty(Object o) {
return o == null;
}
public static boolean empty(Object[] array) {
return array == null || array.length == 0;
}
public static boolean empty(int[] array) { //do the same for other primitives
return array == null || array.length == 0;
}
public static boolean empty(String s) {
return s == null || s.isEmpty();
}
public static boolean empty(Number n) {
return n == null || n.doubleValue() == 0;
}
public static boolean empty(Collection<?> c) {
return c == null || c.isEmpty();
}
public static boolean empty(Map<?, ?> m) {
return m == null || m.isEmpty();
}
Examples:
public static void main(String[] args) {
Object o = null;
System.out.println(empty(o));
System.out.println(empty(""));
System.out.println(empty("as"));
System.out.println(empty(new int[0]));
System.out.println(empty(new int[] { 1, 2}));
System.out.println(empty(Collections.emptyList()));
System.out.println(empty(Arrays.asList("s")));
System.out.println(empty(0));
System.out.println(empty(1));
}

AFAIK there is no such convention. It's fairly common to see project specific utility classes with methods such as:
public static boolean isEmpty(String s) {
return s == null || s.isEmpty();
}
However I personally think its use is a bit of a code smell in Java. There's a lot of badly written Java around, but well written Java shouldn't need null checks everywhere, and you should know enough about the type of an object to apply type-specific definitions of "empty".
The exception would be if you were doing reflection-oriented code that worked with Object variables who's type you don't know at compile time. That code should be so isolated that it's not appropriate to have a util method to support it.
Python's duck-typing means the rules are sort of different.

How about creating an interface EmptinessComparable or something similar, and having all your classes implement that? So you can just expect that, and not have to ask instanceof every time.

Java does not, but Groovy does. Groovy runs on the Java VM alongside Java code and provides many shortcuts and convenient conventions such as this. A good approach is write foundation and crital project components in Java and use Groovy for less critical higher level components.

If you want to use the one approach, I would overload a utility method:
public class MyUtils {
public static boolean isEmpty(String s) {
return s == null || s.isEmpty();
}
public static boolean isEmpty(Boolean b) {
return b == null || !b;
}
// add other versions of the method for other types
}
Then your code always looks like:
if (MyUtils.isEmpty(something))
If the type you're checking isn't supported, you'll get a compiler error, and you can implement another version as you like.

There are ways to establish the notion of emptiness but it's not standardized across all Java classes. For example, the Map (implementation) provides the Map#containsKey() method to check if a key exists or not. The List and String (implementations) provide the isEmpty() method but the List or String reference itself could be null and hence you cannot avoid a null check there.
You could however come up with a utility class of your own that takes an Object and using instanceof adapts the empty checks accordingly.
public final class DataUtils {
public static boolean isEmpty(Object data) {
if (data == null) {
return false;
}
if (data instanceof String) {
return ((String) data).isEmpty();
}
if (data instanceof Collection) {
return ((Collection) data).isEmpty();
}
}
}

The Guava Libraries already contains Defaults class that do just that.
Calling defaultValue will return the default value for any primitive type (as specified by the JLS), and null for any other type.
You can use it like shown below:
import com.google.common.base.Defaults;
Defaults.defaultValue(Integer.TYPE); //will return 0
Below is example code on how to use it:
import com.google.common.base.Defaults;
public class CheckingFieldsDefault
{
public static class MyClass {
private int x;
private int y = 2;
}
public static void main() {
MyClass my = new MyClass();
System.out.println("x is defualt: " + (my.x == Defaults.defaultValue(box(my.x).TYPE)));
System.out.println("y is defualt: " + (my.y == Defaults.defaultValue(box(my.y).TYPE)));
}
private static <T extends Object> T box(T t) {
return t;
}
}