Encapsulating HashMap bulding
in [Java Programming]
|
Prev: Systems Programmer/Support - Application Support Specialist - in Chicago, IL.- 12 months
Next: Free IMS Java and IMS DB Integration Workshops 2010 June 14th thru 25th Ehingen, München, Köln, Frankfurt
From: Robert Klemme on 12 May 2010 04:12 On 12 Mai, 06:11, Lew <no...(a)lewscanon.com> wrote: > Roedy Green writes: > >> Can anyone think of a way to write a method that takes an > >> array of X, and produces a HashMap<Key,X> > Stefan Ram wrote: > > HashMap< Key, X>m( final X[] x ){ return new HashMap< Key, X>(); } > > That is genius. This is my favorite answer so far. > > Most of the other answers just made my head hurt. I wonder what the point is. > Rephrasing, what is the value? I am sorry your brain hurts. ;-) Actually it did not occur to me that the code above is a valid implementation of the requirements before. Rereading Roedy's original posting I think it *is* a valid implementation although I must say that I found his question a bit vague. So, Roedy, what is it that you want? [ ] an empty HashMap with correct types [ ] a filled HashMap where keys are found based on the values in the array [ ] something else, namely _________________________________ _________________________________ Kind regards robert
From: Arne Vajhøj on 12 May 2010 10:39 On 12-05-2010 00:11, Lew wrote: > Roedy Green writes: >>> Can anyone think of a way to write a method that takes an >>> array of X, and produces a HashMap<Key,X> > > Stefan Ram wrote: >> HashMap< Key, X>m( final X[] x ){ return new HashMap< Key, X>(); } > > That is genius. This is my favorite answer so far. I assume that it was a sarcastic comment on the level of precise description in Roedy's question. > Most of the other answers just made my head hurt. I wonder what the > point is. Rephrasing, what is the value? The point in Roedy's questions seems very clear to me. He want to reuse some code for a conversion that he apparently does frequently. Arne
From: Roedy Green on 14 May 2010 19:29 On Tue, 11 May 2010 02:22:07 -0700 (PDT), Robert Klemme <shortcutter(a)googlemail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : >Roedy did not state how exactly the key is obtained for a particular >value although he seems to insinuate that it's a property of the >value. I presumed the key was either a string field in the value or a get method on the value object for a string. For a somewhat more difficult problem, allow the key type to be an arbitrary Object of some generic type. -- Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com Beauty is our business. ~ Edsger Wybe Dijkstra (born: 1930-05-11 died: 2002-08-06 at age: 72) Referring to computer science.
From: Roedy Green on 14 May 2010 19:33 On 12 May 2010 03:14:50 GMT, ram(a)zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : >>Can anyone think of a way to write a method that takes an >>array of X, and produces a HashMap<Key,X> > >HashMap< Key, X >m( final X[] x ){ return new HashMap< Key, X >(); } A lawyer's answer that answers the letter of the spec but not the spirit. -- Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com Beauty is our business. ~ Edsger Wybe Dijkstra (born: 1930-05-11 died: 2002-08-06 at age: 72) Referring to computer science.
From: lewis on 14 May 2010 20:20
Roedy Green wrote: >>>Can anyone think of a way to write a method that takes an >>>array of X, and produces a HashMap<Key,X> > Stefan Ram wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : >>HashMap< Key, X >m( final X[] x ){ return new HashMap< Key, X >(); } > Roedy Green wrote: > A lawyer's answer that answers the letter of the spec but not the > spirit. > That's exactly what makes is so brilliant and funny. You could, should you have a sense of humor, also call it a comedian's answer that answers the letter of the spec but not the spirit. But yeah, there is that nasty precondition. Shakespeare wrote, "First, we kill all the lawyers" as a recipe for how to destabilize a society. -- Lew |