Develop Reference

Prevent coding multiple if/else statements with two changing expressions

I'm a beginner APEX developer (language based off of Java) and I was wondering if there is an efficient way to write conditional statements where two conditions change while the rest remains static.
For instance, in my code below, Countryy__c will change to say UK, US and Canada (besides France) and for each of these countries the Industry will change from Accounting to Medicine to Legal. Meanwhile, lead type and status will always remain as outbound and open respectively. Moreover each Country and Industry combination has a unique 'Owner ID'.
So in other words, there will be a total of 12 if/else statements with 12 different OwnerIds. Given that the code will be messy to maintain in the future if the number of countries and industries grow, is there a better way of coding this?
public static void changeOwnerToQueue(List<String> DeactivatedUserIds){
List<Lead> leadList = new List<Lead>();
List<lead> updatedQueue = new List<Lead>();
leadList = [SELECT Id, OwnerId, Countryy__c, Industry__c, Lead_Type__c, Status from lead
where OwnerId IN :DeactivatedUserIds];
for(Lead l : leadList){
if(l.Countryy__c == 'France' && l.Industry__c == 'Accounting' && l.Lead_Type__c == 'Outbound' && l.Status == 'Open'){
l.OwnerId = '00G5J000000pX41';
updatedQueue.add(l);
}
}

The most maintainable pattern for this kind of mapping in Apex is to use Custom Metadata. You'd create some Custom Metadata Type (MyOwnerMap__mdt), with fields for Country__c, Industry__c, and Owner__c. You'd create Custom Metadata records to represent all of your mappings. Then, in your code, you'd pull that data to create a Map, using a custom class as a key to represent the unique mapping of Country + Industry -> Owner:
class OwnerMapKey {
public String industry;
public String country;
public OwnerMapKey(String ind, String ctry) {
this.industry = ind;
this.country = ctry;
}
public Boolean equals(Object other) {
if (other instanceof OwnerMapKey) {
OwnerMapKey o = (OwnerMapKey)other;
return this.industry == o.industry && this.country == o.country;
}
return false;
}
public Integer hashCode() {
return (this.industry + this.country).hashCode();
}
}
List<MyOwnerMap__mdt> ownerMapValues = MyOwnerMap__mdt.getAll().values();
Map<OwnerMapKey, Id> ownerMap = new Map<OwnerMapKey, Id>();
for (MyOwnerMap__mdt eachOwnerMap: ownerMapValues) {
ownerMap.put(new OwnerMapKey(eachOwnerMap.Industry__c, eachOwnerMap.Country__c), eachOwnerMap.Owner__c);
}
Then, you can easily access the desired Owner value for any combination of Industry and Country. Note that you'll probably want to have a fallback if that entry is missing from your Custom Metadata.
someRecord.OwnerId = ownerMap.get(new OwnerMapKey(SOME_INDUSTRY, SOME_COUNTRY)) || defaultOwner;
(Disclaimer: above code written directly in Stack Overflow and untested).
The reason this pattern is valuable is that your solution then becomes admin-maintainable: you can change the mapping with no code changes and no deployment, just by altering the Custom Metadata records.

Handling additional data in Apache ServiceComb compensation methods

I'm currently looking at the implementations of saga pattern for distributed transactions and I found that Apache ServiceComp pack might be something that works for me.
However, I have found a problem that the limitation of compensating methods to have the same declaration as the methods they compensate may be a bottleneck.
From Apache's example:
#Compensable(compensationMethod = "cancel")
void order(CarBooking booking) {
booking.confirm();
bookings.put(booking.getId(), booking);
}
void cancel(CarBooking booking) {
Integer id = booking.getId();
if (bookings.containsKey(id)) {
bookings.get(id).cancel();
}
}
You can see that we have the same declaration for both methods.
But, what if I need additional information to compensate my transaction? For instance, I have a call to external system to update some flag to "true". When I need to compensate it, how do I make "cancel" method know what the original value of this flag was?
The things get more tricky when we update the whole object. How do I send the whole object before modification to the cancel transaction?
These limitation doesn't look quite promising. Do you know if there are approaches to fight with this limitation?

You can save localTxId and flag an in your application and use localTxId in the compensation method to get the flag
Map extmap = new HashMap();
#Autowired
OmegaContext omegaContext;
#Compensable(compensationMethod = "cancel")
void order(CarBooking booking) {
booking.confirm();
bookings.put(booking.getId(), booking);
//save flag
extmap.put(omegaContext.localTxId(),'Your flag')
}
void cancel(CarBooking booking) {
//get flag
extmap.get(omegaContext.localTxId());
Integer id = booking.getId();
if (bookings.containsKey(id)) {
bookings.get(id).cancel();
}
}

GreenDao - Saving an Entity and related - "Entity is detached from DAO context"

I'm trying to save with GreenDAO an entity called hotel. Each hotel has a relation one-to-many with some agreements and each agreement has got... well, a picture is worth a thousand words.
Now, what I do is the following:
daoSession.runInTx(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
ArrayList<Hotel> listOfHotels = getData().getAvailability();
for(Hotel h : listOfHotels)
{
List<HotelAgreement> hotelAgreements = h.getAgreements();
for(HotelAgreement ha : hotelAgreements) {
ha.setHotel_id(h.getHotel_id());
HotelAgreementDeadline hotelAgreementDeadline = ha.getDeadline();
List<HotelRemark> hr = hotelAgreementDeadline.getRemarks();
List<HotelAgreementDeadlinePolicies> hadp = hotelAgreementDeadline.getPolicies();
daoSession.getHotelReportDao().insertOrReplaceInTx( h.getReports() );
daoSession.getHotelPictureDao().insertOrReplaceInTx( h.getPictures() );
daoSession.getHotelRemarkDao().insertOrReplaceInTx(hr);
daoSession.getHotelAgreementDeadlinePoliciesDao().insertOrReplaceInTx(hadp);
daoSession.getHotelAgreementDeadlineDao().insertOrReplace(hotelAgreementDeadline);
daoSession.getHotelAgreementDao().insertOrReplace(ha);
}
// daoSession.getHotelReportsDao().insertOrReplace( getData().getReports() );
}
daoSession.getHotelDao().insertOrReplaceInTx(listOfHotels);
}
});
This, of course, does not work. I get a "Entity is detached from DAO context" error on the following line:
HotelAgreementDeadline hotelAgreementDeadline = ha.getDeadline();
I understand this is because I try to get the Agreements from a Hotel entity which does not come from the database, but from another source (a web service, in this case). But why does this happen with ha.getDeadline() and not with h.getAgreements()?
Now, I have the Hotel object and it does include pretty much all data: agreements, deadline, policies, remarks, pictures, report. I'd just like to tell GreenDAO: save it! And if I can't and I have to cycle through the tree - which is what I'm trying to do with the code above - how am I supposed to do it?
Here I read that I have to "store/load the object first using a Dao". Pretty awesome, but... how does it work? I read the greenDAO documentation about relations but couldn't find anything.
Thank you to everybody who's willing to help :-)

At some point, when you get the response from the webservice, you are creating new entity objects and filling them with the info. Try inserting each new object in the DB just after that.
If you want, you can insert, for example, all n Agreement for an Hotel using insertOrReplaceInTx, but you shouldn't use any relation before all the involved objects are in the DB.

I think that greendao team have to add the following control in the method
getToOneField() like in the getToManyList()
if(property == null){
code already generated by greendao plugin
}
return property;
so in your case in HotelAgreements class
#Keep
public DeadLine getDeadLine {
if(deadLine == null) {
long __key = this.deadLineId;
if (deadLine__resolvedKey == null || !deadLine__resolvedKey.equals(__key)) {
final DaoSession daoSession = this.daoSession;
if (daoSession == null) {
throw new DaoException("Entity is detached from DAO context");
}
DeadLineDao targetDao = daoSession.getDeadLineDao();
DeadLine deadLineNew = targetDao.load(__key);
synchronized (this) {
deadLine = deadLineNew;
deadLine__resolvedKey = __key;
}
}
}
return deadLine;
}
adding the control
if(deadLine == null) {
...
}
so if you receive data from rest json
the object is populated and getProperty() method return property field from object not from database just like it does with Lists
then you can insert or replace it
Then, when you load or load deeply object from db the property is null and greendao take it from DB

Object-Oriented design simulating a process with states [duplicate]

I have something to do for work and I need your help.
We want to implement a FSM - Finite State Machine, to identify char sequence(like: A, B, C, A, C), and tell if it accepted.
We think to implement three classes: State, Event and Machine.
The state class presents a node in the FSM, we thought to implement it with State design pattern, every node will extend from the abstract class state and every class would handle different types of events and indicate transitions to a new state. Is it good idea in your opinion?
Second thing, we don't know how to save all the transitions. Again we thought to implement it with some kind of map, that hold the starting point and gets some kind of vector with the next states, but I'm not sure thats a good idea.
I would be happy to get some ideas of how to implement it or maybe you can give me some starting points.
How should I save the FSM, meaning how should I build the tree at the beginning of the program?
I googled it and found a lot of examples but nothing that helps me.
Thanks a lot.

The heart of a state machine is the transition table, which takes a state and a symbol (what you're calling an event) to a new state. That's just a two-index array of states. For sanity and type safety, declare the states and symbols as enumerations. I always add a "length" member in some way (language-specific) for checking array bounds. When I've hand-coded FSM's, I format the code in row and column format with whitespace fiddling. The other elements of a state machine are the initial state and the set of accepting states. The most direct implementation of the set of accepting states is an array of booleans indexed by the states. In Java, however, enumerations are classes, and you can specify an argument "accepting" in the declaration for each enumerated value and initialize it in the constructor for the enumeration.
For the machine type, you can write it as a generic class. It would take two type arguments, one for the states and one for the symbols, an array argument for the transition table, a single state for the initial. The only other detail (though it's critical) is that you have to call Enum.ordinal() to get an integer suitable for indexing the transition array, since you there's no syntax for directly declaring an array with a enumeration index (though there ought to be).
To preempt one issue, EnumMap won't work for the transition table, because the key required is a pair of enumeration values, not a single one.
enum State {
Initial( false ),
Final( true ),
Error( false );
static public final Integer length = 1 + Error.ordinal();
final boolean accepting;
State( boolean accepting ) {
this.accepting = accepting;
}
}
enum Symbol {
A, B, C;
static public final Integer length = 1 + C.ordinal();
}
State transition[][] = {
// A B C
{
State.Initial, State.Final, State.Error
}, {
State.Final, State.Initial, State.Error
}
};

EasyFSM is a dynamic Java Library which can be used to implement an FSM.
You can find documentation for the same at :
Finite State Machine in Java
Also, you can download the library at :
Java FSM Library : DynamicEasyFSM

You can implement Finite State Machine in two different ways.
Option 1:
Finite State machine with a pre-defined workflow : Recommended if you know all states in advance and state machine is almost fixed without any changes in future
Identify all possible states in your application
Identify all the events in your application
Identify all the conditions in your application, which may lead state transition
Occurrence of an event may cause transitions of state
Build a finite state machine by deciding a workflow of states & transitions.
e.g If an event 1 occurs at State 1, the state will be updated and machine state may still be in state 1.
If an event 2 occurs at State 1, on some condition evaluation, the system will move from State 1 to State 2
This design is based on State and Context patterns.
Have a look at Finite State Machine prototype classes.
Option 2:
Behavioural trees: Recommended if there are frequent changes to state machine workflow. You can dynamically add new behaviour without breaking the tree.
The base Task class provides a interface for all these tasks, the leaf tasks are the ones just mentioned, and the parent tasks are the interior nodes that decide which task to execute next.
The Tasks have only the logic they need to actually do what is required of them, all the decision logic of whether a task has started or not, if it needs to update, if it has finished with success, etc. is grouped in the TaskController class, and added by composition.
The decorators are tasks that “decorate” another class by wrapping over it and giving it additional logic.
Finally, the Blackboard class is a class owned by the parent AI that every task has a reference to. It works as a knowledge database for all the leaf tasks
Have a look at this article by Jaime Barrachina Verdia for more details

Hmm, I would suggest that you use Flyweight to implement the states. Purpose: Avoid the memory overhead of a large number of small objects. State machines can get very, very big.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyweight_pattern
I'm not sure that I see the need to use design pattern State to implement the nodes. The nodes in a state machine are stateless. They just match the current input symbol to the available transitions from the current state. That is, unless I have entirely forgotten how they work (which is a definite possiblilty).
If I were coding it, I would do something like this:
interface FsmNode {
public boolean canConsume(Symbol sym);
public FsmNode consume(Symbol sym);
// Other methods here to identify the state we are in
}
List<Symbol> input = getSymbols();
FsmNode current = getStartState();
for (final Symbol sym : input) {
if (!current.canConsume(sym)) {
throw new RuntimeException("FSM node " + current + " can't consume symbol " + sym);
}
current = current.consume(sym);
}
System.out.println("FSM consumed all input, end state is " + current);
What would Flyweight do in this case? Well, underneath the FsmNode there would probably be something like this:
Map<Integer, Map<Symbol, Integer>> fsm; // A state is an Integer, the transitions are from symbol to state number
FsmState makeState(int stateNum) {
return new FsmState() {
public FsmState consume(final Symbol sym) {
final Map<Symbol, Integer> transitions = fsm.get(stateNum);
if (transisions == null) {
throw new RuntimeException("Illegal state number " + stateNum);
}
final Integer nextState = transitions.get(sym); // May be null if no transition
return nextState;
}
public boolean canConsume(final Symbol sym) {
return consume(sym) != null;
}
}
}
This creates the State objects on a need-to-use basis, It allows you to use a much more efficient underlying mechanism to store the actual state machine. The one I use here (Map(Integer, Map(Symbol, Integer))) is not particulary efficient.
Note that the Wikipedia page focuses on the cases where many somewhat similar objects share the similar data, as is the case in the String implementation in Java. In my opinion, Flyweight is a tad more general, and covers any on-demand creation of objects with a short life span (use more CPU to save on a more efficient underlying data structure).

Consider the easy, lightweight Java library EasyFlow. From their docs:
With EasyFlow you can:
implement complex logic but keep your code simple and clean
handle asynchronous calls with ease and elegance
avoid concurrency by using event-driven programming approach
avoid StackOverflow error by avoiding recursion
simplify design, programming and testing of complex java applications

I design & implemented a simple finite state machine example with java.
IFiniteStateMachine: The public interface to manage the finite state machine
such as add new states to the finite state machine or transit to next states by specific actions.
interface IFiniteStateMachine {
void setStartState(IState startState);
void setEndState(IState endState);
void addState(IState startState, IState newState, Action action);
void removeState(String targetStateDesc);
IState getCurrentState();
IState getStartState();
IState getEndState();
void transit(Action action);
}
IState: The public interface to get state related info
such as state name and mappings to connected states.
interface IState {
// Returns the mapping for which one action will lead to another state
Map<String, IState> getAdjacentStates();
String getStateDesc();
void addTransit(Action action, IState nextState);
void removeTransit(String targetStateDesc);
}
Action: the class which will cause the transition of states.
public class Action {
private String mActionName;
public Action(String actionName) {
mActionName = actionName;
}
String getActionName() {
return mActionName;
}
#Override
public String toString() {
return mActionName;
}
}
StateImpl: the implementation of IState. I applied data structure such as HashMap to keep Action-State mappings.
public class StateImpl implements IState {
private HashMap<String, IState> mMapping = new HashMap<>();
private String mStateName;
public StateImpl(String stateName) {
mStateName = stateName;
}
#Override
public Map<String, IState> getAdjacentStates() {
return mMapping;
}
#Override
public String getStateDesc() {
return mStateName;
}
#Override
public void addTransit(Action action, IState state) {
mMapping.put(action.toString(), state);
}
#Override
public void removeTransit(String targetStateDesc) {
// get action which directs to target state
String targetAction = null;
for (Map.Entry<String, IState> entry : mMapping.entrySet()) {
IState state = entry.getValue();
if (state.getStateDesc().equals(targetStateDesc)) {
targetAction = entry.getKey();
}
}
mMapping.remove(targetAction);
}
}
FiniteStateMachineImpl: Implementation of IFiniteStateMachine. I use ArrayList to keep all the states.
public class FiniteStateMachineImpl implements IFiniteStateMachine {
private IState mStartState;
private IState mEndState;
private IState mCurrentState;
private ArrayList<IState> mAllStates = new ArrayList<>();
private HashMap<String, ArrayList<IState>> mMapForAllStates = new HashMap<>();
public FiniteStateMachineImpl(){}
#Override
public void setStartState(IState startState) {
mStartState = startState;
mCurrentState = startState;
mAllStates.add(startState);
// todo: might have some value
mMapForAllStates.put(startState.getStateDesc(), new ArrayList<IState>());
}
#Override
public void setEndState(IState endState) {
mEndState = endState;
mAllStates.add(endState);
mMapForAllStates.put(endState.getStateDesc(), new ArrayList<IState>());
}
#Override
public void addState(IState startState, IState newState, Action action) {
// validate startState, newState and action
// update mapping in finite state machine
mAllStates.add(newState);
final String startStateDesc = startState.getStateDesc();
final String newStateDesc = newState.getStateDesc();
mMapForAllStates.put(newStateDesc, new ArrayList<IState>());
ArrayList<IState> adjacentStateList = null;
if (mMapForAllStates.containsKey(startStateDesc)) {
adjacentStateList = mMapForAllStates.get(startStateDesc);
adjacentStateList.add(newState);
} else {
mAllStates.add(startState);
adjacentStateList = new ArrayList<>();
adjacentStateList.add(newState);
}
mMapForAllStates.put(startStateDesc, adjacentStateList);
// update mapping in startState
for (IState state : mAllStates) {
boolean isStartState = state.getStateDesc().equals(startState.getStateDesc());
if (isStartState) {
startState.addTransit(action, newState);
}
}
}
#Override
public void removeState(String targetStateDesc) {
// validate state
if (!mMapForAllStates.containsKey(targetStateDesc)) {
throw new RuntimeException("Don't have state: " + targetStateDesc);
} else {
// remove from mapping
mMapForAllStates.remove(targetStateDesc);
}
// update all state
IState targetState = null;
for (IState state : mAllStates) {
if (state.getStateDesc().equals(targetStateDesc)) {
targetState = state;
} else {
state.removeTransit(targetStateDesc);
}
}
mAllStates.remove(targetState);
}
#Override
public IState getCurrentState() {
return mCurrentState;
}
#Override
public void transit(Action action) {
if (mCurrentState == null) {
throw new RuntimeException("Please setup start state");
}
Map<String, IState> localMapping = mCurrentState.getAdjacentStates();
if (localMapping.containsKey(action.toString())) {
mCurrentState = localMapping.get(action.toString());
} else {
throw new RuntimeException("No action start from current state");
}
}
#Override
public IState getStartState() {
return mStartState;
}
#Override
public IState getEndState() {
return mEndState;
}
}
example:
public class example {
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("Finite state machine!!!");
IState startState = new StateImpl("start");
IState endState = new StateImpl("end");
IFiniteStateMachine fsm = new FiniteStateMachineImpl();
fsm.setStartState(startState);
fsm.setEndState(endState);
IState middle1 = new StateImpl("middle1");
middle1.addTransit(new Action("path1"), endState);
fsm.addState(startState, middle1, new Action("path1"));
System.out.println(fsm.getCurrentState().getStateDesc());
fsm.transit(new Action(("path1")));
System.out.println(fsm.getCurrentState().getStateDesc());
fsm.addState(middle1, endState, new Action("path1-end"));
fsm.transit(new Action(("path1-end")));
System.out.println(fsm.getCurrentState().getStateDesc());
fsm.addState(endState, middle1, new Action("path1-end"));
}
}
Full example on Github

Well this is an old question but while nobody mentioned here, I will advice to check two existing frameworks before you implement you own State Machines.
One is Spring State Machine most of you are familiar with Spring framework, which allow us to use several features of Spring like dependency injection and everything else that Spring can offer.
It is really great for modelling the lifecycle of an Apparat, with states like INITIALIZING, STARTED, ERROR, RECOVERING, SHUTTINGDOWN, etc.. but I see lots of people are trying to model a Shopping Chart, a Reservation System with it, the memory footprint a Spring State Machine is relatively big to model millions of Shopping Charts or Reservations.
One other disadvantage, Spring State Machine, while has a capability to persist itself for long running processes but it does not have any mechanism to adapt to changes in these processes, if you persist a process and you have to recover it lets say 10 days later with a change occurred in your business process because of new software release / requirement, you have no built in means to deal with it.
I have several blogs, blog1 blog2, demonstrating how you can program Spring State Machine, specially model driven way, if you want to check it.
Mainly because the disadvantages I mentioned, I advice you to look another framework first, Akka FSM (Finite State Machine) which is more fitting with its low memory footprint to have millions and millions of instances and has a capability to adapt changing long running processes.
Now you can develop with Akka framework with Java but believe me because of some missing language elements, you don't want to read the produced code, Scala is a much more fitting language to develop with Akka. Now I hear you saying Scala is too complex, I can't convince my project leads to develop with Scala, to convince you all this is an option, I developed a Proof of Concept application using a Java/Scala hybrid with all Scala Akka Finite State Machine code generated from an UML model, if you want to check it out here the links to the blogs, blog3 blog4.
I hope this information would help you.

Here is a SUPER SIMPLE implementation/example of a FSM using just "if-else"s which avoids all of the above subclassing answers (taken from Using Finite State Machines for Pattern Matching in Java, where he is looking for a string which ends with "#" followed by numbers followed by "#"--see state graph here):
public static void main(String[] args) {
String s = "A1#312#";
String digits = "0123456789";
int state = 0;
for (int ind = 0; ind < s.length(); ind++) {
if (state == 0) {
if (s.charAt(ind) == '#')
state = 1;
} else {
boolean isNumber = digits.indexOf(s.charAt(ind)) != -1;
if (state == 1) {
if (isNumber)
state = 2;
else if (s.charAt(ind) == '#')
state = 1;
else
state = 0;
} else if (state == 2) {
if (s.charAt(ind) == '#') {
state = 3;
} else if (isNumber) {
state = 2;
} else if (s.charAt(ind) == '#')
state = 1;
else
state = 0;
} else if (state == 3) {
if (s.charAt(ind) == '#')
state = 1;
else
state = 0;
}
}
} //end for loop
if (state == 3)
System.out.println("It matches");
else
System.out.println("It does not match");
}
P.S: Does not answer your question directly, but shows you how to implement a FSM very easily in Java.

How to implement a FSM - Finite State Machine in Java

I have something to do for work and I need your help.
We want to implement a FSM - Finite State Machine, to identify char sequence(like: A, B, C, A, C), and tell if it accepted.
We think to implement three classes: State, Event and Machine.
The state class presents a node in the FSM, we thought to implement it with State design pattern, every node will extend from the abstract class state and every class would handle different types of events and indicate transitions to a new state. Is it good idea in your opinion?
Second thing, we don't know how to save all the transitions. Again we thought to implement it with some kind of map, that hold the starting point and gets some kind of vector with the next states, but I'm not sure thats a good idea.
I would be happy to get some ideas of how to implement it or maybe you can give me some starting points.
How should I save the FSM, meaning how should I build the tree at the beginning of the program?
I googled it and found a lot of examples but nothing that helps me.
Thanks a lot.

The heart of a state machine is the transition table, which takes a state and a symbol (what you're calling an event) to a new state. That's just a two-index array of states. For sanity and type safety, declare the states and symbols as enumerations. I always add a "length" member in some way (language-specific) for checking array bounds. When I've hand-coded FSM's, I format the code in row and column format with whitespace fiddling. The other elements of a state machine are the initial state and the set of accepting states. The most direct implementation of the set of accepting states is an array of booleans indexed by the states. In Java, however, enumerations are classes, and you can specify an argument "accepting" in the declaration for each enumerated value and initialize it in the constructor for the enumeration.
For the machine type, you can write it as a generic class. It would take two type arguments, one for the states and one for the symbols, an array argument for the transition table, a single state for the initial. The only other detail (though it's critical) is that you have to call Enum.ordinal() to get an integer suitable for indexing the transition array, since you there's no syntax for directly declaring an array with a enumeration index (though there ought to be).
To preempt one issue, EnumMap won't work for the transition table, because the key required is a pair of enumeration values, not a single one.
enum State {
Initial( false ),
Final( true ),
Error( false );
static public final Integer length = 1 + Error.ordinal();
final boolean accepting;
State( boolean accepting ) {
this.accepting = accepting;
}
}
enum Symbol {
A, B, C;
static public final Integer length = 1 + C.ordinal();
}
State transition[][] = {
// A B C
{
State.Initial, State.Final, State.Error
}, {
State.Final, State.Initial, State.Error
}
};

EasyFSM is a dynamic Java Library which can be used to implement an FSM.
You can find documentation for the same at :
Finite State Machine in Java
Also, you can download the library at :
Java FSM Library : DynamicEasyFSM

You can implement Finite State Machine in two different ways.
Option 1:
Finite State machine with a pre-defined workflow : Recommended if you know all states in advance and state machine is almost fixed without any changes in future
Identify all possible states in your application
Identify all the events in your application
Identify all the conditions in your application, which may lead state transition
Occurrence of an event may cause transitions of state
Build a finite state machine by deciding a workflow of states & transitions.
e.g If an event 1 occurs at State 1, the state will be updated and machine state may still be in state 1.
If an event 2 occurs at State 1, on some condition evaluation, the system will move from State 1 to State 2
This design is based on State and Context patterns.
Have a look at Finite State Machine prototype classes.
Option 2:
Behavioural trees: Recommended if there are frequent changes to state machine workflow. You can dynamically add new behaviour without breaking the tree.
The base Task class provides a interface for all these tasks, the leaf tasks are the ones just mentioned, and the parent tasks are the interior nodes that decide which task to execute next.
The Tasks have only the logic they need to actually do what is required of them, all the decision logic of whether a task has started or not, if it needs to update, if it has finished with success, etc. is grouped in the TaskController class, and added by composition.
The decorators are tasks that “decorate” another class by wrapping over it and giving it additional logic.
Finally, the Blackboard class is a class owned by the parent AI that every task has a reference to. It works as a knowledge database for all the leaf tasks
Have a look at this article by Jaime Barrachina Verdia for more details

Hmm, I would suggest that you use Flyweight to implement the states. Purpose: Avoid the memory overhead of a large number of small objects. State machines can get very, very big.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyweight_pattern
I'm not sure that I see the need to use design pattern State to implement the nodes. The nodes in a state machine are stateless. They just match the current input symbol to the available transitions from the current state. That is, unless I have entirely forgotten how they work (which is a definite possiblilty).
If I were coding it, I would do something like this:
interface FsmNode {
public boolean canConsume(Symbol sym);
public FsmNode consume(Symbol sym);
// Other methods here to identify the state we are in
}
List<Symbol> input = getSymbols();
FsmNode current = getStartState();
for (final Symbol sym : input) {
if (!current.canConsume(sym)) {
throw new RuntimeException("FSM node " + current + " can't consume symbol " + sym);
}
current = current.consume(sym);
}
System.out.println("FSM consumed all input, end state is " + current);
What would Flyweight do in this case? Well, underneath the FsmNode there would probably be something like this:
Map<Integer, Map<Symbol, Integer>> fsm; // A state is an Integer, the transitions are from symbol to state number
FsmState makeState(int stateNum) {
return new FsmState() {
public FsmState consume(final Symbol sym) {
final Map<Symbol, Integer> transitions = fsm.get(stateNum);
if (transisions == null) {
throw new RuntimeException("Illegal state number " + stateNum);
}
final Integer nextState = transitions.get(sym); // May be null if no transition
return nextState;
}
public boolean canConsume(final Symbol sym) {
return consume(sym) != null;
}
}
}
This creates the State objects on a need-to-use basis, It allows you to use a much more efficient underlying mechanism to store the actual state machine. The one I use here (Map(Integer, Map(Symbol, Integer))) is not particulary efficient.
Note that the Wikipedia page focuses on the cases where many somewhat similar objects share the similar data, as is the case in the String implementation in Java. In my opinion, Flyweight is a tad more general, and covers any on-demand creation of objects with a short life span (use more CPU to save on a more efficient underlying data structure).

Consider the easy, lightweight Java library EasyFlow. From their docs:
With EasyFlow you can:
implement complex logic but keep your code simple and clean
handle asynchronous calls with ease and elegance
avoid concurrency by using event-driven programming approach
avoid StackOverflow error by avoiding recursion
simplify design, programming and testing of complex java applications

I design & implemented a simple finite state machine example with java.
IFiniteStateMachine: The public interface to manage the finite state machine
such as add new states to the finite state machine or transit to next states by specific actions.
interface IFiniteStateMachine {
void setStartState(IState startState);
void setEndState(IState endState);
void addState(IState startState, IState newState, Action action);
void removeState(String targetStateDesc);
IState getCurrentState();
IState getStartState();
IState getEndState();
void transit(Action action);
}
IState: The public interface to get state related info
such as state name and mappings to connected states.
interface IState {
// Returns the mapping for which one action will lead to another state
Map<String, IState> getAdjacentStates();
String getStateDesc();
void addTransit(Action action, IState nextState);
void removeTransit(String targetStateDesc);
}
Action: the class which will cause the transition of states.
public class Action {
private String mActionName;
public Action(String actionName) {
mActionName = actionName;
}
String getActionName() {
return mActionName;
}
#Override
public String toString() {
return mActionName;
}
}
StateImpl: the implementation of IState. I applied data structure such as HashMap to keep Action-State mappings.
public class StateImpl implements IState {
private HashMap<String, IState> mMapping = new HashMap<>();
private String mStateName;
public StateImpl(String stateName) {
mStateName = stateName;
}
#Override
public Map<String, IState> getAdjacentStates() {
return mMapping;
}
#Override
public String getStateDesc() {
return mStateName;
}
#Override
public void addTransit(Action action, IState state) {
mMapping.put(action.toString(), state);
}
#Override
public void removeTransit(String targetStateDesc) {
// get action which directs to target state
String targetAction = null;
for (Map.Entry<String, IState> entry : mMapping.entrySet()) {
IState state = entry.getValue();
if (state.getStateDesc().equals(targetStateDesc)) {
targetAction = entry.getKey();
}
}
mMapping.remove(targetAction);
}
}
FiniteStateMachineImpl: Implementation of IFiniteStateMachine. I use ArrayList to keep all the states.
public class FiniteStateMachineImpl implements IFiniteStateMachine {
private IState mStartState;
private IState mEndState;
private IState mCurrentState;
private ArrayList<IState> mAllStates = new ArrayList<>();
private HashMap<String, ArrayList<IState>> mMapForAllStates = new HashMap<>();
public FiniteStateMachineImpl(){}
#Override
public void setStartState(IState startState) {
mStartState = startState;
mCurrentState = startState;
mAllStates.add(startState);
// todo: might have some value
mMapForAllStates.put(startState.getStateDesc(), new ArrayList<IState>());
}
#Override
public void setEndState(IState endState) {
mEndState = endState;
mAllStates.add(endState);
mMapForAllStates.put(endState.getStateDesc(), new ArrayList<IState>());
}
#Override
public void addState(IState startState, IState newState, Action action) {
// validate startState, newState and action
// update mapping in finite state machine
mAllStates.add(newState);
final String startStateDesc = startState.getStateDesc();
final String newStateDesc = newState.getStateDesc();
mMapForAllStates.put(newStateDesc, new ArrayList<IState>());
ArrayList<IState> adjacentStateList = null;
if (mMapForAllStates.containsKey(startStateDesc)) {
adjacentStateList = mMapForAllStates.get(startStateDesc);
adjacentStateList.add(newState);
} else {
mAllStates.add(startState);
adjacentStateList = new ArrayList<>();
adjacentStateList.add(newState);
}
mMapForAllStates.put(startStateDesc, adjacentStateList);
// update mapping in startState
for (IState state : mAllStates) {
boolean isStartState = state.getStateDesc().equals(startState.getStateDesc());
if (isStartState) {
startState.addTransit(action, newState);
}
}
}
#Override
public void removeState(String targetStateDesc) {
// validate state
if (!mMapForAllStates.containsKey(targetStateDesc)) {
throw new RuntimeException("Don't have state: " + targetStateDesc);
} else {
// remove from mapping
mMapForAllStates.remove(targetStateDesc);
}
// update all state
IState targetState = null;
for (IState state : mAllStates) {
if (state.getStateDesc().equals(targetStateDesc)) {
targetState = state;
} else {
state.removeTransit(targetStateDesc);
}
}
mAllStates.remove(targetState);
}
#Override
public IState getCurrentState() {
return mCurrentState;
}
#Override
public void transit(Action action) {
if (mCurrentState == null) {
throw new RuntimeException("Please setup start state");
}
Map<String, IState> localMapping = mCurrentState.getAdjacentStates();
if (localMapping.containsKey(action.toString())) {
mCurrentState = localMapping.get(action.toString());
} else {
throw new RuntimeException("No action start from current state");
}
}
#Override
public IState getStartState() {
return mStartState;
}
#Override
public IState getEndState() {
return mEndState;
}
}
example:
public class example {
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("Finite state machine!!!");
IState startState = new StateImpl("start");
IState endState = new StateImpl("end");
IFiniteStateMachine fsm = new FiniteStateMachineImpl();
fsm.setStartState(startState);
fsm.setEndState(endState);
IState middle1 = new StateImpl("middle1");
middle1.addTransit(new Action("path1"), endState);
fsm.addState(startState, middle1, new Action("path1"));
System.out.println(fsm.getCurrentState().getStateDesc());
fsm.transit(new Action(("path1")));
System.out.println(fsm.getCurrentState().getStateDesc());
fsm.addState(middle1, endState, new Action("path1-end"));
fsm.transit(new Action(("path1-end")));
System.out.println(fsm.getCurrentState().getStateDesc());
fsm.addState(endState, middle1, new Action("path1-end"));
}
}
Full example on Github

Well this is an old question but while nobody mentioned here, I will advice to check two existing frameworks before you implement you own State Machines.
One is Spring State Machine most of you are familiar with Spring framework, which allow us to use several features of Spring like dependency injection and everything else that Spring can offer.
It is really great for modelling the lifecycle of an Apparat, with states like INITIALIZING, STARTED, ERROR, RECOVERING, SHUTTINGDOWN, etc.. but I see lots of people are trying to model a Shopping Chart, a Reservation System with it, the memory footprint a Spring State Machine is relatively big to model millions of Shopping Charts or Reservations.
One other disadvantage, Spring State Machine, while has a capability to persist itself for long running processes but it does not have any mechanism to adapt to changes in these processes, if you persist a process and you have to recover it lets say 10 days later with a change occurred in your business process because of new software release / requirement, you have no built in means to deal with it.
I have several blogs, blog1 blog2, demonstrating how you can program Spring State Machine, specially model driven way, if you want to check it.
Mainly because the disadvantages I mentioned, I advice you to look another framework first, Akka FSM (Finite State Machine) which is more fitting with its low memory footprint to have millions and millions of instances and has a capability to adapt changing long running processes.
Now you can develop with Akka framework with Java but believe me because of some missing language elements, you don't want to read the produced code, Scala is a much more fitting language to develop with Akka. Now I hear you saying Scala is too complex, I can't convince my project leads to develop with Scala, to convince you all this is an option, I developed a Proof of Concept application using a Java/Scala hybrid with all Scala Akka Finite State Machine code generated from an UML model, if you want to check it out here the links to the blogs, blog3 blog4.
I hope this information would help you.

Here is a SUPER SIMPLE implementation/example of a FSM using just "if-else"s which avoids all of the above subclassing answers (taken from Using Finite State Machines for Pattern Matching in Java, where he is looking for a string which ends with "#" followed by numbers followed by "#"--see state graph here):
public static void main(String[] args) {
String s = "A1#312#";
String digits = "0123456789";
int state = 0;
for (int ind = 0; ind < s.length(); ind++) {
if (state == 0) {
if (s.charAt(ind) == '#')
state = 1;
} else {
boolean isNumber = digits.indexOf(s.charAt(ind)) != -1;
if (state == 1) {
if (isNumber)
state = 2;
else if (s.charAt(ind) == '#')
state = 1;
else
state = 0;
} else if (state == 2) {
if (s.charAt(ind) == '#') {
state = 3;
} else if (isNumber) {
state = 2;
} else if (s.charAt(ind) == '#')
state = 1;
else
state = 0;
} else if (state == 3) {
if (s.charAt(ind) == '#')
state = 1;
else
state = 0;
}
}
} //end for loop
if (state == 3)
System.out.println("It matches");
else
System.out.println("It does not match");
}
P.S: Does not answer your question directly, but shows you how to implement a FSM very easily in Java.