Creating a byte[] of long size
in [Java Help]
|
Prev: instructor solution manual for Dynamics of Flight- Stability and Control, 3rd Ed by Etkin, Reid
Next: Supply AFF CAPS and hat ( www.nike-black.com )
From: Eric Sosman on 8 Jul 2010 18:15 On 7/8/2010 5:35 PM, Boris Punk wrote: > Integer.MAX_VALUE = 2147483647 > > I might need more items than that. I probably won't, but it's nice to have > extensibility. Then Java is not the language for you. Arrays have int sizes. Not even Collections can get you out of the woods, because their ..size() method must return an int. I suppose you could write your own BigList class, with a .size() method returning long and with .get() and .set() taking long arguments. Such a class could not implement the List interface (because the method signatures wouldn't be right), but you could probably implement Iterable. Or, you could have BigList implement List but "lie" in its .size() method, in somewhat the same way TreeSet "lies" about the Set contract. Then you'd add .realSize(), .realGet(), and .realSet() methods to deal with the long values (I've probably missed a few). ... but I think you'll need a stronger motivation than "it's nice" to justify the work, and the resulting ugliness. Your call, though. -- Eric Sosman esosman(a)ieee-dot-org.invalid
From: Boris Punk on 8 Jul 2010 18:22 "Eric Sosman" <esosman(a)ieee-dot-org.invalid> wrote in message news:i15imo$88e$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > On 7/8/2010 5:35 PM, Boris Punk wrote: >> Integer.MAX_VALUE = 2147483647 >> >> I might need more items than that. I probably won't, but it's nice to >> have >> extensibility. > > Then Java is not the language for you. Arrays have int sizes. > Not even Collections can get you out of the woods, because their > .size() method must return an int. > > I suppose you could write your own BigList class, with a .size() > method returning long and with .get() and .set() taking long arguments. > Such a class could not implement the List interface (because the method > signatures wouldn't be right), but you could probably implement > Iterable. > > Or, you could have BigList implement List but "lie" in its .size() > method, in somewhat the same way TreeSet "lies" about the Set contract. > Then you'd add .realSize(), .realGet(), and .realSet() methods to deal > with the long values (I've probably missed a few). > > ... but I think you'll need a stronger motivation than "it's nice" > to justify the work, and the resulting ugliness. Your call, though. > > -- > Eric Sosman > esosman(a)ieee-dot-org.invalid Is there no BigList/BigHash in Java?
From: Arne Vajhøj on 8 Jul 2010 18:49 On 08-07-2010 18:22, Boris Punk wrote: > Is there no BigList/BigHash in Java? No. But You can have a List<List<X>> which can then store 4*10^18 X'es. Arne
From: Arne Vajhøj on 8 Jul 2010 19:22 On 08-07-2010 17:35, Boris Punk wrote: > Integer.MAX_VALUE = 2147483647 > > I might need more items than that. I probably won't, but it's nice to have > extensibility. It is a lot of data. I think you should assume YAGNI. Arne
From: Arne Vajhøj on 8 Jul 2010 19:55
On 08-07-2010 17:15, Lew wrote: > From the JLS, which I strongly urge you to study: Unless the poster has a solid programming experience, then the JLS may not be the best to study. Sure it is by definition correct, but it is written to be detailed and correct not to be easy to read. Arne |