I have studied that Generics are used to shift the Class Cast Exception into Compile time errors , So that we get errors at compile time error and we do correct them before executing ,but Here is a program in which i am getting Class Cast Exception
class Animal
{
}
class Dog extends Animal
{
}
class Cat extends Animal
[code]..
Getting Exception at line no 29 which i know why it occurs but just wanna ask that isn't it should be caught at compile time According to Generics ?
I am trying to compare some items from a generic arraylist with each other, but I keep getting an error stating that I need to cast the values in line 38. However, when I heed the warning and change it to what it wants, I get a warning stating "type safety: Unchecked cast from K to Comparable<K>". Should I ignore this warning or is there a better way to compare the two items? Also, is there another way for me to use compareTo w/o making my class extending/implementing comparable or is that the only way?Here is what I have:
class WordInfo<K, V extends Comparable <K>> { private FileReader fr; private String word; private ArrayList<K> list; private BufferedReader br; private int current = 0;
short s = Short.MAX_VALUE; char c = s; System.out.println( c == Short.MAX_VALUE);
Correct Option is : B
A. True
B. False
Explanation:
This will not compile because a short VARIABLE can NEVER be assigned to a char without explicit casting. A short CONSTANT can be assigned to a char only if the value fits into a char.
short s = 1; byte b = s; => this will also not compile because although value is small enough to be held by a byte but the Right Hand Side i.e. s is a variable and not a constant. final short s = 1; byte b = s; => This is fine because s is a constant and the value fits into a byte. final short s = 200; byte b = s; => This is invalid because although s is a constant but the value does not fit into a byte. Implicit narrowing occurs only for byte, char, short, and int. Remember that it does not
occur for long, float, or double. So, this will not compile: int i = 129L;The below code compiles fine and contradicts what is said in bold. So what does the bold statement mean then?
Java Code: class BreakTest{ public static void main(String args[]) { float f=1.0f; double d=f; } } mh_sh_highlight_all('java');
I'm looking for a heuristic explanation of how to think of an "interface" as a type. I'm used to think of the 'type' of a class coming form its very definition but I often see casting to an interface which I still feel very uncomfortable about.Other than an interface, are there other unusual ways a 'type' may be referred to?
A second basic question: When you user 'super.f()', will Java go up the calling chain until it finds method 'f' (and report an err if none is found) or does it expect to find 'f' immediately at its very first parent?
import java.io.IOException; import java.util.*; public class Guesser { public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException { char[] alphabet = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz1234567890 .,:;'-".toCharArray();
[Code] .....
I'm writing a program which will take a three letter word (for now) and then try to guess the word over and over again until it finds it, then print the word and the amount of tries it took to find it.
The problem: at the moment the program will find the word but not break out of the for loop when it does. I think it doesn't like the char to String conversion somewhere along the line.
how to calculate the child's height in float value fixing value where if you choose male the accurate value, but if you choose female the value will be accurate too.
int heightMother, heightFather; int heightMaleChild, heightFemaleChild; String gender;
There is a sentence in JLS 7 which I can't figure it out. It says :
A cast from a type S to a parameterized type T is unchecked unless at least one of the following conditions holds: -S <: T -All of the type arguments (§4.5.1) of T are unbounded wildcards -T <: S and S has no subtype X other than T where the type arguments of X are not contained in the type arguments of T.
Condition one and two I got it. But the number three is really bugging me. I write some code in order to try to understand it.
class G<X>{} class D<T,U> extends G<T>{} G<String> g = new G<>(); D<String, Integer> dd = (D<String, Integer>) g;
In Eclipse I got no warning but it shouldn't give one ?
Because g has others subtypes than D<String, Integer> (e.g. D<String, List> , D<String, G>)
Am I missing something about the contained type arguments ?
import java.util.*; public class CommonElements { private int comparisons; // number of comparisons made private Comparable[] arrayToSearch; // current array being traversed private Comparable[] commonElements = new Comparable[10]; private int arrayPosition = 0; //keeps track of what index to add an element to common at
[Code] ...
I have trying to get this down to the bar minimum. I am trying to cast the desired object array to a array of comparable. This is all required by the assignment.
I am getting a runtime error that I can not perform the desired cast. What do I need to provide the compiler in order to allow for this casting. I can not change the signature of the method however nothing about the class has been specified do I need to implement comparable? Also I don not now what the client is passing so how would I write a generic compareTo method to compare object of unknown types.
Set<? super TreeMap> s = new HashSet<SortedMap>();
SortedMap<String,String> sm = new TreeMap<String,String>(); TreeMap<String,String> tm = new TreeMap<String,String>(); s.add(sm); //This fails s.add(tm);
Why does adding sorted map to a Set that allows ? super TreeMap and instantiated as such fail?
public int[] allIndicesOf(E itemSought) { ArrayList<Integer> toUse = new ArrayList<>(); for (E anArray : container) { if (anArray.equals(itemSought)) { toUse.add(container.indexOf(itemSought));
[Code] ....
I have an array list of strings. I want to be able to return an array of integers telling me which indexes in the string array list contain the itemSought object.
Why java uses the keyword extends when setting the bound of a type parameter(Generic) to an interface. I think using the keyword implements is more intuitive.
public static <T extends Comparable<T>>
why use extends? and not implements.
int countGreaterThan(T[] anArray, T elem) { int count = 0; for (T e : anArray) if (e.compareTo(elem) > 0) ++count; return count; }
I know if I want to set multiple bounds I will use extends keyword, and I will concatenate the bounds using & operator.
Is this a design decision to always use extends keyword to set bounds?
public static <E extends Comparable<E>> void sort(E[] list... mh_sh_highlight_all('java');
Comparable is an interface and from how i look at this piece of code is that I can only use a class that implements the Comparable interface; however, this is the context my book uses when explaining the following code
First, it specifies that E is a subtype of Comparable.
Second, it specifies that the elements to be compared are of the E type as well.
I've an interface with generic methods in it. I would like to have specialized methods in the sub types. While doing that I'm seeing the following warnings in eclipse.
class Sorter { <E> void sort(E[] elements); };
class StringSorter {
// This gives me a warning 'hiding' to 'sort' <String> void sort(String[] elements) { }
// Gives me an error "The method someCrap(String[]) in the type StringSorter is not applicable for the arguments (String[])" void someCrap(String[] elements) { } };
I would like to understand why eclipse gives the above warnings and errors.
I'm working with Doubly Linked Lists and using Java Generics..
My nodes looks like this: class DNode<E> { DNode<E> previous; DNode<E> next; E element;
//and all methods inside }
My list of Nodes looks like this: class DLL<E>{ private DNode<E> head; private DNode<E> tail; private int size;
[code]....
As you can see, as arguments they get "E o"...I need to write a program, which from the main function asks the users how long is the list, and after they type it's length, I ask them to start typing the elements (integers)...and this is how my main method is written, but I can't seem to make it work, specialy when I call the "insLast" method,I guess it's because the arguments i'm giving to the function...how to read the elements and write them into the list?
public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException { DLL<Integer> lista=new DLL<Integer>(); BufferedReader stdin = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(System.in)); String s = stdin.readLine(); int N = Integer.parseInt(s); s = stdin.readLine(); String[] pomniza = s.split(" "); for (int i = 0; i < N; i++) { lista.instLast(Integer.parseInt(pomniza[i])); }
i am interested to add integer objects and String objects into any collection object ..... while iterating the collection object i am not interested to do any type cast in java
I am trying to make a generic method that will replace the data type T with those number types usable with a Scanner object. However, whenever I try to compile, I get errors saying that a Byte/Integer/Double etc are found when only a type T is allowed. This is the beginning of my method. I can;t understand what is wrong with it.
Java Code:
public <T extends Number> T nextRanged(T lowerBound, T upperBound, boolean inclusive, String errorMessage){ // Holds program execution until user inputs a numeric value between the bounds. Prevents all other input without exception. // Output data type determined by the type of the bounds. T input = null; try{ if(input instanceof Byte){ input = new Byte(internalScanner.nextByte());
[Code] ....
The purpose of the method, in the end, will be to provide the nextXXX() functionality of a Scanner object but with built in validation procedures. I could easily do this by making a nextIntRanged(), nextDoubleRanged() etc methods, but this seems wasteful to me.
I meant "incompatible type errors"!
Error example:
ValidatedScanner.java:57: error: incompatible types input = new Byte(internalScanner.nextByte()); ^ required: T found: Byte
where T is a type-variable:
T extends Number declared in method <T>nextRanged(T,T,boolean,String)
The erasures of all constituent types of a bound must be pairwise different, or a compile-time error occurs.
Well I know what type erasure is, and I think I kind got what this statement means. My understanding from it is that if your type parameter has more than one bound and those bounds occurs to be the same type after erasure that is a compile-time error. Is that it?
The only thing I could found related is something like this:
class A<T extends List<Integer> & List<Integer>>{ }
Which as you might know gives the Duplicated bound error.
