Search Results

Search found 184 results on 8 pages for 'hashcode'.

Page 4/8 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  | Next Page >

  • Scala n00b: Critique my code

    - by Peter
    G'day everyone, I'm a Scala n00b (but am experienced with other languages) and am learning the language as I find time - very much enjoying it so far! Usually when learning a new language the first thing I do is implement Conway's Game of Life, since it's just complex enough to give a good sense of the language, but small enough in scope to be able to whip up in a couple of hours (most of which is spent wrestling with syntax). Anyhoo, having gone through this exercise with Scala I was hoping the Scala gurus out there might take a look at the code I've ended up with and provide feedback on it. I'm after anything - algorithmic improvements (particularly concurrent solutions!), stylistic improvements, alternative APIs or language constructs, disgust at the length of my function names - whatever feedback you've got, I'm keen to hear it! You should be able to run the following script via "scala GameOfLife.scala" - by default it will run a 20x20 board with a single glider on it - please feel free to experiment. // CONWAY'S GAME OF LIFE (SCALA) abstract class GameOfLifeBoard(val aliveCells : Set[Tuple2[Int, Int]]) { // Executes a "time tick" - returns a new board containing the next generation def tick : GameOfLifeBoard // Is the board empty? def empty : Boolean = aliveCells.size == 0 // Is the given cell alive? protected def alive(cell : Tuple2[Int, Int]) : Boolean = aliveCells contains cell // Is the given cell dead? protected def dead(cell : Tuple2[Int, Int]) : Boolean = !alive(cell) } class InfiniteGameOfLifeBoard(aliveCells : Set[Tuple2[Int, Int]]) extends GameOfLifeBoard(aliveCells) { // Executes a "time tick" - returns a new board containing the next generation override def tick : GameOfLifeBoard = new InfiniteGameOfLifeBoard(nextGeneration) // The next generation of this board protected def nextGeneration : Set[Tuple2[Int, Int]] = aliveCells flatMap neighbours filter shouldCellLiveInNextGeneration // Should the given cell should live in the next generation? protected def shouldCellLiveInNextGeneration(cell : Tuple2[Int, Int]) : Boolean = (alive(cell) && (numberOfAliveNeighbours(cell) == 2 || numberOfAliveNeighbours(cell) == 3)) || (dead(cell) && numberOfAliveNeighbours(cell) == 3) // The number of alive neighbours for the given cell protected def numberOfAliveNeighbours(cell : Tuple2[Int, Int]) : Int = aliveNeighbours(cell) size // Returns the alive neighbours for the given cell protected def aliveNeighbours(cell : Tuple2[Int, Int]) : Set[Tuple2[Int, Int]] = aliveCells intersect neighbours(cell) // Returns all neighbours (whether dead or alive) for the given cell protected def neighbours(cell : Tuple2[Int, Int]) : Set[Tuple2[Int, Int]] = Set((cell._1-1, cell._2-1), (cell._1, cell._2-1), (cell._1+1, cell._2-1), (cell._1-1, cell._2), (cell._1+1, cell._2), (cell._1-1, cell._2+1), (cell._1, cell._2+1), (cell._1+1, cell._2+1)) // Information on where the currently live cells are protected def xVals = aliveCells map { cell => cell._1 } protected def xMin = (xVals reduceLeft (_ min _)) - 1 protected def xMax = (xVals reduceLeft (_ max _)) + 1 protected def xRange = xMin until xMax + 1 protected def yVals = aliveCells map { cell => cell._2 } protected def yMin = (yVals reduceLeft (_ min _)) - 1 protected def yMax = (yVals reduceLeft (_ max _)) + 1 protected def yRange = yMin until yMax + 1 // Returns a simple graphical representation of this board override def toString : String = { var result = "" for (y <- yRange) { for (x <- xRange) { if (alive (x,y)) result += "# " else result += ". " } result += "\n" } result } // Equality stuff override def equals(other : Any) : Boolean = { other match { case that : InfiniteGameOfLifeBoard => (that canEqual this) && that.aliveCells == this.aliveCells case _ => false } } def canEqual(other : Any) : Boolean = other.isInstanceOf[InfiniteGameOfLifeBoard] override def hashCode = aliveCells.hashCode } class FiniteGameOfLifeBoard(val boardWidth : Int, val boardHeight : Int, aliveCells : Set[Tuple2[Int, Int]]) extends InfiniteGameOfLifeBoard(aliveCells) { override def tick : GameOfLifeBoard = new FiniteGameOfLifeBoard(boardWidth, boardHeight, nextGeneration) // Determines the coordinates of all of the neighbours of the given cell override protected def neighbours(cell : Tuple2[Int, Int]) : Set[Tuple2[Int, Int]] = super.neighbours(cell) filter { cell => cell._1 >= 0 && cell._1 < boardWidth && cell._2 >= 0 && cell._2 < boardHeight } // Information on where the currently live cells are override protected def xRange = 0 until boardWidth override protected def yRange = 0 until boardHeight // Equality stuff override def equals(other : Any) : Boolean = { other match { case that : FiniteGameOfLifeBoard => (that canEqual this) && that.boardWidth == this.boardWidth && that.boardHeight == this.boardHeight && that.aliveCells == this.aliveCells case _ => false } } override def canEqual(other : Any) : Boolean = other.isInstanceOf[FiniteGameOfLifeBoard] override def hashCode : Int = { 41 * ( 41 * ( 41 + super.hashCode ) + boardHeight.hashCode ) + boardWidth.hashCode } } class GameOfLife(initialBoard: GameOfLifeBoard) { // Run the game of life until the board is empty or the exact same board is seen twice // Important note: this method does NOT necessarily terminate!! def go : Unit = { var currentBoard = initialBoard var previousBoards = List[GameOfLifeBoard]() while (!currentBoard.empty && !(previousBoards contains currentBoard)) { print(27.toChar + "[2J") // ANSI: clear screen print(27.toChar + "[;H") // ANSI: move cursor to top left corner of screen println(currentBoard.toString) Thread.sleep(75) // Warning: unbounded list concatenation can result in OutOfMemoryExceptions ####TODO: replace with LRU bounded list previousBoards = List(currentBoard) ::: previousBoards currentBoard = currentBoard tick } // Print the final board print(27.toChar + "[2J") // ANSI: clear screen print(27.toChar + "[;H") // ANSI: move cursor to top left corner of screen println(currentBoard.toString) } } // Script starts here val simple = Set((1,1)) val square = Set((4,4), (4,5), (5,4), (5,5)) val glider = Set((2,1), (3,2), (1,3), (2,3), (3,3)) val initialBoard = glider (new GameOfLife(new FiniteGameOfLifeBoard(20, 20, initialBoard))).go //(new GameOfLife(new InfiniteGameOfLifeBoard(initialBoard))).go // COPYRIGHT PETER MONKS 2010 Thanks! Peter

    Read the article

  • Hibernate - strange order of native SQL parameters

    - by Xorty
    Hello, I am trying to use native MySQL's MD5 crypto func, so I defined custom insert in my mapping file. <hibernate-mapping package="tutorial"> <class name="com.xorty.mailclient.client.domain.User" table="user"> <id name="login" type="string" column="login"></id> <property name="password"> <column name="password" /> </property> <sql-insert>INSERT INTO user (login,password) VALUES ( ?, MD5(?) )</sql-insert> </class> </hibernate-mapping> Then I create User (pretty simple POJO with just 2 Strings - login and password) and try to persist it. session.beginTransaction(); // we have no such user in here yet User junitUser = (User) session.load(User.class, "junit_user"); assert (null == junitUser); // insert new user junitUser = new User(); junitUser.setLogin("junit_user"); junitUser.setPassword("junitpass"); session.save(junitUser); session.getTransaction().commit(); What actually happens? User is created, but with reversed parameters order. He has login "junitpass" and "junit_user" is MD5 encrypted and stored as password. What did I wrong? Thanks EDIT: ADDING POJO class package com.xorty.mailclient.client.domain; import java.io.Serializable; /** * POJO class representing user. * @author MisoV * @version 0.1 */ public class User implements Serializable { /** * Generated UID */ private static final long serialVersionUID = -969127095912324468L; private String login; private String password; /** * @return login */ public String getLogin() { return login; } /** * @return password */ public String getPassword() { return password; } /** * @param login the login to set */ public void setLogin(String login) { this.login = login; } /** * @param password the password to set */ public void setPassword(String password) { this.password = password; } /** * @see java.lang.Object#toString() * @return login */ @Override public String toString() { return login; } /** * Creates new User. * @param login User's login. * @param password User's password. */ public User(String login, String password) { setLogin(login); setPassword(password); } /** * Default constructor */ public User() { } /** * @return hashCode * @see java.lang.Object#hashCode() */ @Override public int hashCode() { final int prime = 31; int result = 1; result = prime * result + ((null == login) ? 0 : login.hashCode()); result = prime * result + ((null == password) ? 0 : password.hashCode()); return result; } /** * @param obj Compared object * @return True, if objects are same. Else false. * @see java.lang.Object#equals(java.lang.Object) */ @Override public boolean equals(Object obj) { if (this == obj) { return true; } if (obj == null) { return false; } if (!(obj instanceof User)) { return false; } User other = (User) obj; if (login == null) { if (other.login != null) { return false; } } else if (!login.equals(other.login)) { return false; } if (password == null) { if (other.password != null) { return false; } } else if (!password.equals(other.password)) { return false; } return true; } }

    Read the article

  • Prism Commands - binding error when binding to list element ?

    - by Maciek
    I've got a ItemsControl (to be replaced by listbox) which has it's ItemsSource bound to an ObservableCollection<User> which is located in the view model. The View Model contains some DelegateCommand<T> delegates for handling commands (for instance UpdateUserCommand and RemoveUserCommand). All works fine if the buttons linked to those commands are placed outside of the DataTemplate of the control which is presenting the items. <ItemsControl ItemsSource="{Binding Users, Mode=TwoWay}" HorizontalContentAlignment="Stretch"> <ItemsControl.ItemTemplate> <DataTemplate> <Grid> <Grid.ColumnDefinitions> <ColumnDefinition Width="0.2*"/> <ColumnDefinition Width="0.2*"/> <ColumnDefinition Width="0.2*"/> <ColumnDefinition Width="0.2*"/> <ColumnDefinition Width="0.2*"/> </Grid.ColumnDefinitions> <TextBlock Grid.Column="0" Text="{Binding UserName}"/> <PasswordBox Grid.Column="1" Password="{Binding UserPass}"/> <TextBox Grid.Column="2" Text="{Binding UserTypeId}"/> <Button Grid.Column="3" Content="Update" cal:Click.Command="{Binding UpdateUserCommand}" cal:Click.CommandParameter="{Binding}"/> <Button Grid.Column="4" Content="Remove" cal:Click.Command="{Binding RemoveUserCommand}" cal:Click.CommandParameter="{Binding}"/> </Grid> </DataTemplate> </ItemsControl.ItemTemplate> </ItemsControl> What I'm trying to achieve, is : Have each row - generated by the ListView/ItemsControl - contain buttons to manage the item represented that particular row. During the runtime, the VS's output panel generated the following messages for each listbox element System.Windows.Data Error: BindingExpression path error: 'UpdateUserCommand' property not found on 'ModuleAdmin.Services.User' 'ModuleAdmin.Services.User' (HashCode=35912612). BindingExpression: Path='UpdateUserCommand' DataItem='ModuleAdmin.Services.User' (HashCode=35912612); target element is 'System.Windows.Controls.Button' (Name=''); target property is 'Command' (type 'System.Windows.Input.ICommand').. System.Windows.Data Error: BindingExpression path error: 'RemoveUserCommand' property not found on 'ModuleAdmin.Services.User' 'ModuleAdmin.Services.User' (HashCode=35912612). BindingExpression: Path='RemoveUserCommand' DataItem='ModuleAdmin.Services.User' (HashCode=35912612); target element is 'System.Windows.Controls.Button' (Name=''); target property is 'Command' (type 'System.Windows.Input.ICommand').. Which would imply that there are binding errors present. Is there any way to make this right? or is this not the way?

    Read the article

  • Java Reflection Utility

    - by DD
    Is there a utility to get a property which isnt prefixed by get from an object using reflection similar to BeanUtils? e.g. if I specify "hashcode" and I want to get the object.hashcode() value. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Java: omitting a data member from the equals method.

    - by cchampion
    public class GamePiece { public GamePiece(char cLetter, int nPointValue) { m_cLetter=cLetter; m_nPointValue=nPointValue; m_nTurnPlaced=0; //has not been placed on game board yet. } public char GetLetter() {return m_cLetter;} public int GetPointValue() {return m_nPointValue;} public int GetTurnPlaced() {return m_nTurnPlaced;} public void SetTurnPlaced(int nTurnPlaced) { m_nTurnPlaced=nTurnPlaced; } @Override public boolean equals(Object obj) { /*NOTE to keep this shorter I omitted some of the null checking and instanceof stuff. */ GamePiece other = (GamePiece) obj; //not case sensitive, and I don`t think we want it to be here. if(m_cLetter != other.m_cLetter) { return false; } if(m_nPointValue != other.m_nPointValue) { return false; } /* NOTICE! m_nPointValue purposely omitted. It does not affect hashcode or equals */ return true; } @Override public int hashCode() { /* NOTICE! m_nPointValue purposely omitted. It should not affect hashcode or equals */ final int prime = 41; return prime * (prime + m_nPointValue + m_cLetter); } private char m_cLetter; private int m_nPointValue; private int m_nTurnPlaced;//turn which the game piece was placed on the game board. Does not affect equals or has code! } Consider the given piece of code. This object has been immutable until the introduction of the m_nTurnPlaced member (which can be modified by the SetTurnPlaced method, so now GamePiece becomes mutable). GamePiece is used in an ArrayList, I call contains and remove methods which both rely on the equals method to be implemented. My question is this, is it ok or common practice in Java for some members to not affect equals and hashcode? How will this affect its use in my ArrayList? What type of java Collections would it NOT be safe to use this object now that it is mutable? I've been told that you're not supposed to override equals on mutable objects because it causes some collections to behave "strangely" (I read that somewhere in the java documentation).

    Read the article

  • object reference set in java

    - by landon9720
    I need to create a Set of objects. The concern is I do not want to base the hashing or the equality on the objects' hashCode and equals implementation. Instead, I want the hash code and equality to be based only on each object's reference identity (i.e.: the value of the reference pointer). I'm not sure how to do this in Java. The reasoning behind this is my objects do not reliably implement equals or hashCode, and in this case reference identity is good enough.

    Read the article

  • Hashtable comparator problem

    - by user288245
    Hi guys i've never written a comparator b4 and im having a real problem. I've created a hashtable. Hashtable <String, Objects> ht; Could someone show how you'd write a comparator for a Hashtable? the examples i've seen overide equals and everything but i simply dont have a clue. The code below is not mine but an example i found, the key thing in hashtables means i cant do it like this i guess. public class Comparator implements Comparable<Name> { private final String firstName, lastName; public void Name(String firstName, String lastName) { if (firstName == null || lastName == null) throw new NullPointerException(); this.firstName = firstName; this.lastName = lastName; } public String firstName() { return firstName; } public String lastName() { return lastName; } public boolean equals(Object o) { if (!(o instanceof Name)) return false; Name n = (Name)o; return n.firstName.equals(firstName) && n.lastName.equals(lastName); } public int hashCode() { return 31*firstName.hashCode() + lastName.hashCode(); } public String toString() { return firstName + " " + lastName; } public int compareTo(Name n) { int lastCmp = lastName.compareTo(n.lastName); return (lastCmp != 0 ? lastCmp : firstName.compareTo(n.firstName)); } }

    Read the article

  • Serializing and deserializing a map with key as string

    - by Grace K
    Hi! I am intending to serialize and deserialize a hashmap whose key is a string. From Josh Bloch's Effective Java, I understand the following. P.222 "For example, consider the case of a harsh table. The physical representation is a sequence of hash buckets containing key-value entries. Which bucket an entry is placed in is a function of the hash code of the key, which is not, in general guaranteed to be the same from JVM implementation to JVM implementation. In fact, it isn't even guranteed to be the same from run to run on the same JVM implementation. Therefore accepting the default serialized form for a hash table would constitute a serious bug. Serializing and deserializing the hash table could yield an object whose invariants were seriously corrupt." My questions are: 1) In general, would overriding the equals and hashcode of the key class of the map resolve this issue and the map can be correctly restored? 2) If my key is a String and the String class is already overriding the hashCode() method, would I still have problem described above. (I am seeing a bug which makes me think this is probably still a problem even though the key is String with overriding hashCode.) 3)Previously, I get around this issue by serializing an array of entries (key, value) and when deserializing I would reconstruct the map. I am wondering if there is a better approach. 4) If the answers to question 1 and 2 are that I still can't be guaranteed. Could someone explain why? If the hashCodes are the same would they go to the same buckets across JVMs? Thanks, Grace

    Read the article

  • Java HashMap containsKey always false

    - by Dennis
    I have the funny situation, that I store a Coordinate into a HashMap<Coordinate, GUIGameField>. Now, the strange thing about it is, that I have a fragment of code, which should guard, that no coordinate should be used twice. But if I debug this code: if (mapForLevel.containsKey(coord)) { throw new IllegalStateException("This coordinate is already used!"); } else { ...do stuff... } ... the containsKey always returns false, although I stored a coordinate with a hashcode of 9731 into the map and the current coord also has the hashcode 9731. After that, the mapForLevel.entrySet() looks like: (java.util.HashMap$EntrySet) [(270,90)=gui.GUIGameField@29e357, (270,90)=gui.GUIGameField@ca470] What could I have possibly done wrong? I ran out of ideas. Thanks for any help! public class Coordinate { int xCoord; int yCoord; public Coordinate(int x, int y) { ...store params in attributes... } ...getters & setters... @Override public int hashCode() { int hash = 1; hash = hash * 41 + this.xCoord; hash = hash * 31 + this.yCoord; return hash; } }

    Read the article

  • Recommendation for using equals in Entities and avoiding LazyInitializationExceptions?

    - by huxendupsel
    In the beginning there is a problem that wants to be solved. In my case i got an LazyInitializationException while using indexof in a Collection to retrieve an Object for manipulation. Here i start to think about using equals in EntityBeans (OR-Mapper at all). I know there are some discussions about overriding equals in association with OR-Mapper as hibernate like [1] Entities equals(), hashCode() and toString(). How to correctly implement them? [2] To equals and hashcode or not on entity classes, that is the question. [3] Overriding equals and hashCode in Java I currently have some entities which implements the equals but inside the code i could not use equals several times because of the LazyInitializationExceptions. So i had to workaround and use eg. the name property of the object to identify it's equality. From my point of view the whole 'LazyInitializationException-thing' is not really mentioned in this questions. I'd like to know have you got some good patterns or real live recommendations how to avoid such exception in an equal-Method. Shall i use some helper Methodes to distinguish if a Object of a class is already initialized (4) or should i apdicate the use of equals and use helper classes instead (2)? And what is about catching LazyInitializationExceptions in the equals? [Edit]: If you put equals in context with the initialization of the Object then it will gain importance. Sometimes it is nessesary to have the Object fully initialized but sometimes you don't want to. Because you just need the Object itself (name, id, ...) not its Collection-Properties. So just for equalization you have to reattach the Object and load the whole bunch you don't realy need? Are there any other solutions for such a problem?

    Read the article

  • Are Interfaces "Object"?

    - by PrashantGupta
    package inheritance; class A{ public String display(){ return "This is A!"; } } interface Workable{ public String work(); } class B extends A implements Workable{ public String work(){ return "B is working!"; } } public class TestInterfaceObject{ public static void main(String... args){ B obj=new B(); Workable w=obj; //System.out.println(w.work()); //invoking work method on Workable type reference System.out.println(w.display()); //invoking display method on Workable type reference //System.out.println(w.hashCode()); // invoking Object's hashCode method on Workable type reference } } As we know that methods which can be invoked depend upon the type of the reference variable on which we are going to invoke. Here, in the code, work() method was invoked on "w" reference (which is Workable type) so method invoking will compile successfully. Then, display() method is invoked on "w" which yields a compilation error which says display method was not found, quite obvious as Workable doesn't know about it. Then we try to invoke the Object class's method i.e. hashCode() which yields a successful compilation and execution. How is it possible? Any logical explanation?

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework 4.0 and DDD patterns

    - by Voice
    Hi everybody I use EntityFramework as ORM and I have simple POCO Domain Model with two base classes that represent Value Object and Entity Object Patterns (Evans). These two patterns is all about equality of two objects, so I overrode Equals and GetHashCode methods. Here are these two classes: public abstract class EntityObject<T>{ protected T _ID = default(T); public T ID { get { return _ID; } protected set { _ID = value; } } public sealed override bool Equals(object obj) { EntityObject<T> compareTo = obj as EntityObject<T>; return (compareTo != null) && ((HasSameNonDefaultIdAs(compareTo) || (IsTransient && compareTo.IsTransient)) && HasSameBusinessSignatureAs(compareTo)); } public virtual void MakeTransient() { _ID = default(T); } public bool IsTransient { get { return _ID == null || _ID.Equals(default(T)); } } public override int GetHashCode() { if (default(T).Equals(_ID)) return 0; return _ID.GetHashCode(); } private bool HasSameBusinessSignatureAs(EntityObject<T> compareTo) { return ToString().Equals(compareTo.ToString()); } private bool HasSameNonDefaultIdAs(EntityObject<T> compareTo) { return (_ID != null && !_ID.Equals(default(T))) && (compareTo._ID != null && !compareTo._ID.Equals(default(T))) && _ID.Equals(compareTo._ID); } public override string ToString() { StringBuilder str = new StringBuilder(); str.Append(" Class: ").Append(GetType().FullName); if (!IsTransient) str.Append(" ID: " + _ID); return str.ToString(); } } public abstract class ValueObject<T, U> : IEquatable<T> where T : ValueObject<T, U> { private static List<PropertyInfo> Properties { get; set; } private static Func<ValueObject<T, U>, PropertyInfo, object[], object> _GetPropValue; static ValueObject() { Properties = new List<PropertyInfo>(); var propParam = Expression.Parameter(typeof(PropertyInfo), "propParam"); var target = Expression.Parameter(typeof(ValueObject<T, U>), "target"); var indexPar = Expression.Parameter(typeof(object[]), "indexPar"); var call = Expression.Call(propParam, typeof(PropertyInfo).GetMethod("GetValue", new[] { typeof(object), typeof(object[]) }), new[] { target, indexPar }); var lambda = Expression.Lambda<Func<ValueObject<T, U>, PropertyInfo, object[], object>>(call, target, propParam, indexPar); _GetPropValue = lambda.Compile(); } public U ID { get; protected set; } public override Boolean Equals(Object obj) { if (ReferenceEquals(null, obj)) return false; if (obj.GetType() != GetType()) return false; return Equals(obj as T); } public Boolean Equals(T other) { if (ReferenceEquals(null, other)) return false; if (ReferenceEquals(this, other)) return true; foreach (var property in Properties) { var oneValue = _GetPropValue(this, property, null); var otherValue = _GetPropValue(other, property, null); if (null == oneValue && null == otherValue) return false; if (false == oneValue.Equals(otherValue)) return false; } return true; } public override Int32 GetHashCode() { var hashCode = 36; foreach (var property in Properties) { var propertyValue = _GetPropValue(this, property, null); if (null == propertyValue) continue; hashCode = hashCode ^ propertyValue.GetHashCode(); } return hashCode; } public override String ToString() { var stringBuilder = new StringBuilder(); foreach (var property in Properties) { var propertyValue = _GetPropValue(this, property, null); if (null == propertyValue) continue; stringBuilder.Append(propertyValue.ToString()); } return stringBuilder.ToString(); } protected static void RegisterProperty(Expression<Func<T, Object>> expression) { MemberExpression memberExpression; if (ExpressionType.Convert == expression.Body.NodeType) { var body = (UnaryExpression)expression.Body; memberExpression = body.Operand as MemberExpression; } else memberExpression = expression.Body as MemberExpression; if (null == memberExpression) throw new InvalidOperationException("InvalidMemberExpression"); Properties.Add(memberExpression.Member as PropertyInfo); } } Everything was OK until I tried to delete some related objects (aggregate root object with two dependent objects which was marked for cascade deletion): I've got an exception "The relationship could not be changed because one or more of the foreign-key properties is non-nullable". I googled this and found http://blog.abodit.com/2010/05/the-relationship-could-not-be-changed-because-one-or-more-of-the-foreign-key-properties-is-non-nullable/ I changed GetHashCode to base.GetHashCode() and error disappeared. But now it breaks all my code: I can't override GetHashCode for my POCO objects = I can't override Equals = I can't implement Value Object and Entity Object patters for my POCO objects. So, I appreciate any solutions, workarounds here etc.

    Read the article

  • Hibernate MappingException

    - by Marcus
    I'm getting this Hibernate error: org.hibernate.MappingException: Could not determine type for: a.b.c.Results$BusinessDate, for columns: [org.hibernate.mapping.Column(businessDate)] The class is below. Does anyone know why I'm getting this error?? @XmlAccessorType(XmlAccessType.FIELD) @XmlType(name = "", propOrder = { "businessDate" }) @XmlRootElement(name = "Results") @Entity(name = "Results") @Table(name = "RESULT") @Inheritance(strategy = InheritanceType.JOINED) @Cache(usage = CacheConcurrencyStrategy.READ_ONLY) public class Results implements Equals, HashCode { @XmlElement(name = "BusinessDate", required = true) protected Results.BusinessDate businessDate; public Results.BusinessDate getBusinessDate() { return businessDate; } public void setBusinessDate(Results.BusinessDate value) { this.businessDate = value; } @XmlAccessorType(XmlAccessType.FIELD) @XmlType(name = "", propOrder = { "raw", "display" }) @Entity(name = "Results$BusinessDate") @Table(name = "BUSINESSDATE") @Inheritance(strategy = InheritanceType.JOINED) public static class BusinessDate implements Equals, HashCode { ....

    Read the article

  • Best practices regarding equals: to overload or not to overload?

    - by polygenelubricants
    Consider the following snippet: import java.util.*; public class EqualsOverload { public static void main(String[] args) { class Thing { final int x; Thing(int x) { this.x = x; } public int hashCode() { return x; } public boolean equals(Thing other) { return this.x == other.x; } } List<Thing> myThings = Arrays.asList(new Thing(42)); System.out.println(myThings.contains(new Thing(42))); // prints "false" } } Note that contains returns false!!! We seems to have lost our things!! The bug, of course, is the fact that we've accidentally overloaded, instead of overridden, Object.equals(Object). If we had written class Thing as follows instead, then contains returns true as expected. class Thing { final int x; Thing(int x) { this.x = x; } public int hashCode() { return x; } @Override public boolean equals(Object o) { return (o instanceof Thing) && (this.x == ((Thing) o).x); } } Effective Java 2nd Edition, Item 36: Consistently use the Override annotation, uses essentially the same argument to recommend that @Override should be used consistently. This advice is good, of course, for if we had tried to declare @Override equals(Thing other) in the first snippet, our friendly little compiler would immediately point out our silly little mistake, since it's an overload, not an override. What the book doesn't specifically cover, however, is whether overloading equals is a good idea to begin with. Essentially, there are 3 situations: Overload only, no override -- ALMOST CERTAINLY WRONG! This is essentially the first snippet above Override only (no overload) -- one way to fix This is essentially the second snippet above Overload and override combo -- another way to fix The 3rd situation is illustrated by the following snippet: class Thing { final int x; Thing(int x) { this.x = x; } public int hashCode() { return x; } public boolean equals(Thing other) { return this.x == other.x; } @Override public boolean equals(Object o) { return (o instanceof Thing) && (this.equals((Thing) o)); } } Here, even though we now have 2 equals method, there is still one equality logic, and it's located in the overload. The @Override simply delegates to the overload. So the questions are: What are the pros and cons of "override only" vs "overload & override combo"? Is there a justification for overloading equals, or is this almost certainly a bad practice?

    Read the article

  • Validation.HasError attached property

    - by Nima
    Did I miss something? 1- Style <Style TargetType="{x:Type TextBox}"> <Style.Triggers> <DataTrigger Binding="{Binding Path=Validation.HasError}" Value="true"> <Setter Property="BorderBrush" Value="Blue" /> </DataTrigger> </Style.Triggers> <Setter Property="MinWidth" Value="160" /> <Setter Property="Margin" Value="0 7 0 0"/> </Style> 2 - Viewmodel implement IDataErrorInfo 3- textBox in view <TextBox x:Name="FirstName" Text="{Binding Person.FirstName, UpdateSourceTrigger=PropertyChanged, ValidatesOnDataErrors=true}"></TextBox> 3 - I use Caliburn MVVM I got " BindingExpression path error: 'Validation' property not found on 'object' ''PersonWindowViewModel' (HashCode=38783181)'. BindingExpression:Path=Validation.HasError; DataItem='PersonWindowViewModel' (HashCode=38783181); target element is 'TextBox' (Name='FirstName'); target property is 'NoTarget' (type 'Object')"S

    Read the article

  • Output of System.out.println(object)

    - by Shaarad Dalvi
    I want to know what exactly the output tells when I do the following : class data { int a=5; } class main { public static void main(String[] args) { data dObj=new data(); System.out.println(dObj); } } I know it gives something related to object as the output in my case is data@1ae73783. I guess the '1ae73783' is a hex number. I also did some work around and printed System.out.println(dObj.hashCode()); I got number 415360643. I got an integer value. I don't know what hashCode() returns, still out of curiosity, when I converted 1ae73783 to decimal, I got 415360643! That's why I am curious that what exactly is this number?? Is this some memory location of Java's sandbox or some other thing? Any light on this matter will be helpful..thanks! :)

    Read the article

  • Compute hex color code for an arbitrary string

    - by user222164
    Heading Is there a way to map an arbitrary string to a HEX COLOR code. I tried to compute the HEX number for string using string hashcode. Now I need to convert this hex number to six digits which are in HEX color code range. Any suggestions ? String [] programs = {"XYZ", "TEST1", "TEST2", "TEST3", "SDFSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS"}; for(int i = 0; i < programs.length; i++) { System.out.println( programs[i] + " -- " + Integer.toHexString(programs[i].hashCode())); }

    Read the article

  • h:selectOneMenu not populating a 'selected' item

    - by dann.dev
    I'm having trouble with an h:selectOneMenu not having a selected item when there is already something set on the backing bean. I am using seam and have specified a customer converter. When working on my 'creation' page, everything works fine, something from the menu can be selected, and when the page is submitted, the correct value is assigned and persisted to the database as well. However when I work on my 'edit' page the menu's default selection is not the current selection. i have gone through and confirmed that something is definitely set etc. My selectOneMenu looks like this: <h:selectOneMenu id="selVariable" value="#{customer.variableLookup}" converter="#{variableLookupConverter}"> <s:selectItems var="source" value="#{customerReferenceHelper.variableLookups()}" label="#{source.name}" /> </h:selectOneMenu> And the converter is below. It very simple and just turns the id from string to int and back etc: @Name( "sourceOfWealthLookupConverter" ) public class SourceOfWealthLookupConverter implements Serializable, Converter { @In private CustomerReferenceHelper customerReferenceHelper; @Override public Object getAsObject( FacesContext arg0, UIComponent arg1, String arg2 ) { VariableLookup variable= null; try { if ( "org.jboss.seam.ui.NoSelectionConverter.noSelectionValue".equals( arg2 ) ) { return null; } CustomerReferenceHelper customerReferenceHelper = ( CustomerReferenceHelper ) Contexts.getApplicationContext().get( "customerReferenceHelper" ); Integer id = Integer.parseInt( arg2 ); source = customerReferenceHelper.getVariable( id ); } catch ( NumberFormatException e ) { log.error( e, e ); } return variable; } @Override public String getAsString( FacesContext arg0, UIComponent arg1, Object arg2 ) { String result = null; VariableLookup variable= ( VariableLookup ) arg2; Integer id = variable.getId(); result = String.valueOf( id ); return result; } } I've seen a few things about it possibly being the equals() method on the class, (that doesn't add up with everything else working, but I overrode it anyway as below, where the hashcode is just the id (id is a unique identifier for each item). Equals method: @Override public boolean equals( Object other ) { if ( other == null ) { return false; } if ( this == other ) { return true; } if ( !( other instanceof VariableLookup ) ) { return false; } VariableLookup otherVariable = ( VariableLookup ) other; if ( this.hashCode() == otherVariable.hashCode() ) { return true; } return false; } I'm at my wits end with this, I can't find what I could have missed?! Any help would be much appreciated

    Read the article

  • Savable in Widget Lookup on Move Action

    - by Geertjan
    Possible from 7.3 onwards, since Widget now implements Lookup.Provider for the first time: import java.awt.Point; import java.io.IOException; import org.netbeans.api.visual.action.ActionFactory; import org.netbeans.api.visual.action.MoveProvider; import org.netbeans.api.visual.widget.LabelWidget; import org.netbeans.api.visual.widget.Scene; import org.netbeans.api.visual.widget.Widget; import org.netbeans.spi.actions.AbstractSavable; import org.openide.util.Lookup; import org.openide.util.lookup.AbstractLookup; import org.openide.util.lookup.InstanceContent; import org.openide.windows.TopComponent; public class MyWidget extends LabelWidget { private MySavable mySavable; private Lookup lookup; private TopComponent tc; private InstanceContent ic; public MyWidget(Scene scene, String label, TopComponent tc) { super(scene, label); this.tc = tc; ic = new InstanceContent(); getActions().addAction(ActionFactory.createMoveAction(null, new MoveStrategyProvider())); } @Override public Lookup getLookup() { if (lookup == null) { lookup = new AbstractLookup(ic); } return lookup; } private class MoveStrategyProvider implements MoveProvider { @Override public void movementStarted(Widget widget) { } @Override public void movementFinished(Widget widget) { modify(); } @Override public Point getOriginalLocation(Widget widget) { return ActionFactory.createDefaultMoveProvider().getOriginalLocation(widget); } @Override public void setNewLocation(Widget widget, Point point) { ActionFactory.createDefaultMoveProvider().setNewLocation(widget, point); } } private void modify() { if (getLookup().lookup(MySavable.class) == null) { ic.add(mySavable = new MySavable()); } } private class MySavable extends AbstractSavable { public MySavable() { register(); } TopComponent tc() { return tc; } @Override protected String findDisplayName() { return getLabel(); } @Override protected void handleSave() throws IOException { ic.remove(mySavable); unregister(); } @Override public boolean equals(Object obj) { if (obj instanceof MySavable) { MySavable m = (MySavable) obj; return tc() == m.tc(); } return false; } @Override public int hashCode() { return tc().hashCode(); } } }

    Read the article

  • Foreign key not stored in child entity (one-to-many)

    - by Kamil Los
    Hi, I'm quite new to hibernate and have stumbled on this problem, which I can't find solution for. When persisting parent object (with one-to-many relationship with child), the foreign-key to this parent is not stored in child's table. My classes: Parent.java @javax.persistence.Table(name = "PARENT") @Entity public class PARENT { private Integer id; @javax.persistence.Column(name = "ID") @Id @GeneratedValue(strategy=GenerationType.AUTO) public Integer getId() { return id; } public void setId(Integer id) { this.id = id; } private Collection<Child> children; @OneToMany(mappedBy = "parent", fetch = FetchType.EAGER, cascade = {CascadeType.ALL}) @Cascade({org.hibernate.annotations.CascadeType.ALL}) public Collection<Child> getChildren() { return children; } public void setChildren(Collection<Child> children) { this.children = children; } } Child.java @javax.persistence.Table(name = "CHILD") @Entity @IdClass(Child.ChildId.class) public class Child { private String childId1; @Id public String getChildId1() { return childId1; } public void setChildId1(String childId1) { this.childId1 = childId1; } private String childId2; @Id public String getChildId2() { return childId2; } public void setChildId2(String childId2) { this.childId2 = childId2; } private Parent parent; @ManyToOne @javax.persistence.JoinColumn(name = "PARENT_ID", referencedColumnName = "ID") public Parent getParent() { return parent; } public void setParent(Operation parent) { this.parent = parent; } public static class ChildId implements Serializable { private String childId1; @javax.persistence.Column(name = "CHILD_ID1") public String getChildId1() { return childId1; } public void setChildId1(String childId1) { this.childId1 = childId1; } private String childId2; @javax.persistence.Column(name = "CHIILD_ID2") public String getChildId2() { return childId2; } public void setChildId2(String childId2) { this.childId2 = childId2; } public ChildId() { } @Override public boolean equals(Object o) { if (this == o) return true; if (o == null || getClass() != o.getClass()) return false; ChildId that = (ChildId) o; if (childId1 != null ? !childId1.equals(that.childId1) : that.childId1 != null) return false; if (childId2 != null ? !childId2.equals(that.childId2) : that.childId2 != null) return false; return true; } @Override public int hashCode() { int result = childId1 != null ? childId1.hashCode() : 0; result = 31 * result + (childId2 != null ? childId2.hashCode() : 0); return result; } } } Test.java public class Test() { private ParentDao parentDao; public void setParentDao(ParentDao parentDao) { this.parentDao = parentDao; } private ChildDao childDao; public void setChildDao(ChildDao childDao) { this.childDao = parentDao; } test1() { Parent parent = new Parent(); Child child = new Child(); child.setChildId1("a"); child.setChildId2("b"); ArrayList<Child> children = new ArrayList<Child>(); children.add(child); parent.setChildren(children); parent.setValue("value"); parentDao.save(parent); //calls hibernate's currentSession.saveOrUpdate(entity) } test2() { Parent parent = new Parent(); parent.setValue("value"); parentDao.save(parent); //calls hibernate's currentSession.saveOrUpdate(entity) Child child = new Child(); child.setChildId1("a"); child.setChildId2("b"); child.setParent(parent); childDao.save(); //calls hibernate's currentSession.saveOrUpdate(entity) } } When calling test1(), both entities get written to database, but field PARENT_ID in CHILD table stays empty. The only workaround I have so far is test2() - persisting parent first, and then the child. My goal is to persist parent and its children in one call to save() on Parent. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • HashMap key problems

    - by Peterdk
    I'm profiling some old java code and it appears that my caching of values using a static HashMap and a access method does not work. Caching code (a bit abstracted): static HashMap<Key, Value> cache = new HashMap<Key, Value>(); public static Value getValue(Key key){ System.out.println("cache size="+ cache.size()); if (cache.containsKey(key)) { System.out.println("cache hit"); return cache.get(key); } else { System.out.println("no cache hit"); Value value = calcValue(); cache.put(key, value); return value; } } Profiling code: for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) { getValue(new Key()); } Result output: cache size=0 no cache hit (..) cache size=99 no cache hit It looked like a standard error in Key's hashing code or equals code. However: new Key().hashcode == new Key().hashcode // TRUE new Key().equals(new Key()) // TRUE What's especially weird is that cache.put(key, value) just adds another value to the hashmap, instead of replacing the current one. So, I don't really get what's going on here. Am I doing something wrong?

    Read the article

  • What would you like to correct and/or improve in this java implementation of Chain Of Responsibility

    - by Maciek Kreft
    package design.pattern.behavioral; import design.pattern.behavioral.ChainOfResponsibility.*; public class ChainOfResponsibility { public static class Chain { private Request[] requests = null; private Handler[] handlers = null; public Chain(Handler[] handlers, Request[] requests){ this.handlers = handlers; this.requests = requests; } public void start() { for(Request r : requests) for (Handler h : handlers) if(h.handle(r)) break; } } public static class Request { private int value; public Request setValue(int value){ this.value = value; return this; } public int getValue() { return value; } } public static class Handler<T1> { private Lambda<T1> lambda = null; private Lambda<T1> command = null; public Handler(Lambda<T1> condition, Lambda<T1> command) { this.lambda = condition; this.command = command; } public boolean handle(T1 request) { if (lambda.lambda(request)) command.lambda(request); return lambda.lambda(request); } } public static abstract class Lambda<T1>{ public abstract Boolean lambda(T1 request); } } class TestChainOfResponsibility { public static void main(String[] args) { new TestChainOfResponsibility().test(); } private void test() { new Chain(new Handler[]{ // chain of responsibility new Handler<Request>( new Lambda<Request>(){ // command public Boolean lambda(Request condition) { return condition.getValue() >= 600; } }, new Lambda<Request>(){ public Boolean lambda(Request command) { System.out.println("You are rich: " + command.getValue() + " (id: " + command.hashCode() + ")"); return true; } } ), new Handler<Request>( new Lambda<Request>(){ public Boolean lambda(Request condition) { return condition.getValue() >= 100; } }, new Lambda<Request>(){ public Boolean lambda(Request command) { System.out.println("You are poor: " + command.getValue() + " (id: " + command.hashCode() + ")"); return true; } } ), }, new Request[]{ new Request().setValue(600), // chaining method new Request().setValue(100), } ).start(); } }

    Read the article

  • .NET port with Java's Map, Set, HashMap

    - by Nikos Baxevanis
    I am porting Java code in .NET and I am stuck in the following lines that (behave unexpectedly in .NET). Java: Map<Set<State>, Set<State>> sets = new HashMap<Set<State>, Set<State>>(); Set<State> p = new HashSet<State>(); if (!sets.containsKey(p)) { ... } The equivalent .NET code could possibly be: IDictionary<HashSet<State>, HashSet<State>> sets = new Dictionary<HashSet<State>, HashSet<State>>(); HashSet<State> p = new HashSet<State>(); if (!sets.containsKey(p)) { /* (Add to a list). Always get here in .NET (??) */ } However the code comparison fails, the program think that "sets" never contain Key "p" and eventually results in OutOfMemoryException. Perhaps I am missing something, object equality and identity might be different between Java and .NET. I tried implementing IComparable and IEquatable in class State but the results were the same. Edit: What the code does is: If the sets does not contain key "p" (which is a HashSet) it is going to add "p" at the end of a LinkedList. The State class (Java) is a simple class defined as: public class State implements Comparable<State> { boolean accept; Set<Transition> transitions; int number; int id; static int next_id; public State() { resetTransitions(); id = next_id++; } // ... public int compareTo(State s) { return s.id - id; } public boolean equals(Object obj) { return super.equals(obj); } public int hashCode() { return super.hashCode(); }

    Read the article

  • Inside the Concurrent Collections: ConcurrentDictionary

    - by Simon Cooper
    Using locks to implement a thread-safe collection is rather like using a sledgehammer - unsubtle, easy to understand, and tends to make any other tool redundant. Unlike the previous two collections I looked at, ConcurrentStack and ConcurrentQueue, ConcurrentDictionary uses locks quite heavily. However, it is careful to wield locks only where necessary to ensure that concurrency is maximised. This will, by necessity, be a higher-level look than my other posts in this series, as there is quite a lot of code and logic in ConcurrentDictionary. Therefore, I do recommend that you have ConcurrentDictionary open in a decompiler to have a look at all the details that I skip over. The problem with locks There's several things to bear in mind when using locks, as encapsulated by the lock keyword in C# and the System.Threading.Monitor class in .NET (if you're unsure as to what lock does in C#, I briefly covered it in my first post in the series): Locks block threads The most obvious problem is that threads waiting on a lock can't do any work at all. No preparatory work, no 'optimistic' work like in ConcurrentQueue and ConcurrentStack, nothing. It sits there, waiting to be unblocked. This is bad if you're trying to maximise concurrency. Locks are slow Whereas most of the methods on the Interlocked class can be compiled down to a single CPU instruction, ensuring atomicity at the hardware level, taking out a lock requires some heavy lifting by the CLR and the operating system. There's quite a bit of work required to take out a lock, block other threads, and wake them up again. If locks are used heavily, this impacts performance. Deadlocks When using locks there's always the possibility of a deadlock - two threads, each holding a lock, each trying to aquire the other's lock. Fortunately, this can be avoided with careful programming and structured lock-taking, as we'll see. So, it's important to minimise where locks are used to maximise the concurrency and performance of the collection. Implementation As you might expect, ConcurrentDictionary is similar in basic implementation to the non-concurrent Dictionary, which I studied in a previous post. I'll be using some concepts introduced there, so I recommend you have a quick read of it. So, if you were implementing a thread-safe dictionary, what would you do? The naive implementation is to simply have a single lock around all methods accessing the dictionary. This would work, but doesn't allow much concurrency. Fortunately, the bucketing used by Dictionary allows a simple but effective improvement to this - one lock per bucket. This allows different threads modifying different buckets to do so in parallel. Any thread making changes to the contents of a bucket takes the lock for that bucket, ensuring those changes are thread-safe. The method that maps each bucket to a lock is the GetBucketAndLockNo method: private void GetBucketAndLockNo( int hashcode, out int bucketNo, out int lockNo, int bucketCount) { // the bucket number is the hashcode (without the initial sign bit) // modulo the number of buckets bucketNo = (hashcode & 0x7fffffff) % bucketCount; // and the lock number is the bucket number modulo the number of locks lockNo = bucketNo % m_locks.Length; } However, this does require some changes to how the buckets are implemented. The 'implicit' linked list within a single backing array used by the non-concurrent Dictionary adds a dependency between separate buckets, as every bucket uses the same backing array. Instead, ConcurrentDictionary uses a strict linked list on each bucket: This ensures that each bucket is entirely separate from all other buckets; adding or removing an item from a bucket is independent to any changes to other buckets. Modifying the dictionary All the operations on the dictionary follow the same basic pattern: void AlterBucket(TKey key, ...) { int bucketNo, lockNo; 1: GetBucketAndLockNo( key.GetHashCode(), out bucketNo, out lockNo, m_buckets.Length); 2: lock (m_locks[lockNo]) { 3: Node headNode = m_buckets[bucketNo]; 4: Mutate the node linked list as appropriate } } For example, when adding another entry to the dictionary, you would iterate through the linked list to check whether the key exists already, and add the new entry as the head node. When removing items, you would find the entry to remove (if it exists), and remove the node from the linked list. Adding, updating, and removing items all follow this pattern. Performance issues There is a problem we have to address at this point. If the number of buckets in the dictionary is fixed in the constructor, then the performance will degrade from O(1) to O(n) when a large number of items are added to the dictionary. As more and more items get added to the linked lists in each bucket, the lookup operations will spend most of their time traversing a linear linked list. To fix this, the buckets array has to be resized once the number of items in each bucket has gone over a certain limit. (In ConcurrentDictionary this limit is when the size of the largest bucket is greater than the number of buckets for each lock. This check is done at the end of the TryAddInternal method.) Resizing the bucket array and re-hashing everything affects every bucket in the collection. Therefore, this operation needs to take out every lock in the collection. Taking out mutiple locks at once inevitably summons the spectre of the deadlock; two threads each hold a lock, and each trying to acquire the other lock. How can we eliminate this? Simple - ensure that threads never try to 'swap' locks in this fashion. When taking out multiple locks, always take them out in the same order, and always take out all the locks you need before starting to release them. In ConcurrentDictionary, this is controlled by the AcquireLocks, AcquireAllLocks and ReleaseLocks methods. Locks are always taken out and released in the order they are in the m_locks array, and locks are all released right at the end of the method in a finally block. At this point, it's worth pointing out that the locks array is never re-assigned, even when the buckets array is increased in size. The number of locks is fixed in the constructor by the concurrencyLevel parameter. This simplifies programming the locks; you don't have to check if the locks array has changed or been re-assigned before taking out a lock object. And you can be sure that when a thread takes out a lock, another thread isn't going to re-assign the lock array. This would create a new series of lock objects, thus allowing another thread to ignore the existing locks (and any threads controlling them), breaking thread-safety. Consequences of growing the array Just because we're using locks doesn't mean that race conditions aren't a problem. We can see this by looking at the GrowTable method. The operation of this method can be boiled down to: private void GrowTable(Node[] buckets) { try { 1: Acquire first lock in the locks array // this causes any other thread trying to take out // all the locks to block because the first lock in the array // is always the one taken out first // check if another thread has already resized the buckets array // while we were waiting to acquire the first lock 2: if (buckets != m_buckets) return; 3: Calculate the new size of the backing array 4: Node[] array = new array[size]; 5: Acquire all the remaining locks 6: Re-hash the contents of the existing buckets into array 7: m_buckets = array; } finally { 8: Release all locks } } As you can see, there's already a check for a race condition at step 2, for the case when the GrowTable method is called twice in quick succession on two separate threads. One will successfully resize the buckets array (blocking the second in the meantime), when the second thread is unblocked it'll see that the array has already been resized & exit without doing anything. There is another case we need to consider; looking back at the AlterBucket method above, consider the following situation: Thread 1 calls AlterBucket; step 1 is executed to get the bucket and lock numbers. Thread 2 calls GrowTable and executes steps 1-5; thread 1 is blocked when it tries to take out the lock in step 2. Thread 2 re-hashes everything, re-assigns the buckets array, and releases all the locks (steps 6-8). Thread 1 is unblocked and continues executing, but the calculated bucket and lock numbers are no longer valid. Between calculating the correct bucket and lock number and taking out the lock, another thread has changed where everything is. Not exactly thread-safe. Well, a similar problem was solved in ConcurrentStack and ConcurrentQueue by storing a local copy of the state, doing the necessary calculations, then checking if that state is still valid. We can use a similar idea here: void AlterBucket(TKey key, ...) { while (true) { Node[] buckets = m_buckets; int bucketNo, lockNo; GetBucketAndLockNo( key.GetHashCode(), out bucketNo, out lockNo, buckets.Length); lock (m_locks[lockNo]) { // if the state has changed, go back to the start if (buckets != m_buckets) continue; Node headNode = m_buckets[bucketNo]; Mutate the node linked list as appropriate } break; } } TryGetValue and GetEnumerator And so, finally, we get onto TryGetValue and GetEnumerator. I've left these to the end because, well, they don't actually use any locks. How can this be? Whenever you change a bucket, you need to take out the corresponding lock, yes? Indeed you do. However, it is important to note that TryGetValue and GetEnumerator don't actually change anything. Just as immutable objects are, by definition, thread-safe, read-only operations don't need to take out a lock because they don't change anything. All lockless methods can happily iterate through the buckets and linked lists without worrying about locking anything. However, this does put restrictions on how the other methods operate. Because there could be another thread in the middle of reading the dictionary at any time (even if a lock is taken out), the dictionary has to be in a valid state at all times. Every change to state has to be made visible to other threads in a single atomic operation (all relevant variables are marked volatile to help with this). This restriction ensures that whatever the reading threads are doing, they never read the dictionary in an invalid state (eg items that should be in the collection temporarily removed from the linked list, or reading a node that has had it's key & value removed before the node itself has been removed from the linked list). Fortunately, all the operations needed to change the dictionary can be done in that way. Bucket resizes are made visible when the new array is assigned back to the m_buckets variable. Any additions or modifications to a node are done by creating a new node, then splicing it into the existing list using a single variable assignment. Node removals are simply done by re-assigning the node's m_next pointer. Because the dictionary can be changed by another thread during execution of the lockless methods, the GetEnumerator method is liable to return dirty reads - changes made to the dictionary after GetEnumerator was called, but before the enumeration got to that point in the dictionary. It's worth listing at this point which methods are lockless, and which take out all the locks in the dictionary to ensure they get a consistent view of the dictionary: Lockless: TryGetValue GetEnumerator The indexer getter ContainsKey Takes out every lock (lockfull?): Count IsEmpty Keys Values CopyTo ToArray Concurrent principles That covers the overall implementation of ConcurrentDictionary. I haven't even begun to scratch the surface of this sophisticated collection. That I leave to you. However, we've looked at enough to be able to extract some useful principles for concurrent programming: Partitioning When using locks, the work is partitioned into independant chunks, each with its own lock. Each partition can then be modified concurrently to other partitions. Ordered lock-taking When a method does need to control the entire collection, locks are taken and released in a fixed order to prevent deadlocks. Lockless reads Read operations that don't care about dirty reads don't take out any lock; the rest of the collection is implemented so that any reading thread always has a consistent view of the collection. That leads us to the final collection in this little series - ConcurrentBag. Lacking a non-concurrent analogy, it is quite different to any other collection in the class libraries. Prepare your thinking hats!

    Read the article

  • Problem regarding listShuttle component in richFaces ?

    - by Hari
    I am a newbee for Richfaces components, When i am using the <rich:listShuttle> the Arraylist specified in the targetValue is now getting updated with the latest data? Kindly help MyJSF File <a4j:region> <rich:listShuttle sourceValue="#{bean.selectItems}" id="one" targetValue="#{bean.selectItemsone}" var="items" listsHeight="150" sourceListWidth="130" targetListWidth="130" sourceCaptionLabel="Intial Items" targetCaptionLabel="Selected Items" converter="Listconverter"> <rich:column> <h:outputText value="#{items.value}"></h:outputText> </rich:column> </rich:listShuttle> </a4j:region> <a4j:region> <a4j:commandButton value="Submit" action="#{bean.action}" /> </a4j:region> My Managed Bean enter code here private List<String> selectedData; private List<BeanItems> selectItems; private List<BeanItems> selectItemsone; public String action() { System.out.println(selectItems); System.out.println(selectItemsone); System.out.println("Select Item List"); Iterator<BeanItems> iterator = selectItems.iterator(); while (iterator.hasNext()) { BeanItems item = (BeanItems) iterator.next(); System.out.println(item.getValue()); } System.out.println("/nSelect Item one list "); Iterator<BeanItems> iterator2 = selectItemsone.iterator(); while (iterator2.hasNext()) { BeanItems item = (BeanItems) iterator2.next(); System.out.println(item.getValue()); } return ""; } public void setSelectedData(List<String> selectedData) { this.selectedData = selectedData; } public List<String> getSelectedData() { return selectedData; } /** * @return the selectItems */ public List<BeanItems> getSelectItems() { if (selectItems == null) { selectItems = new ArrayList<BeanItems>(); selectItems.add(new BeanItems("value4", "label4")); selectItems.add(new BeanItems("value5", "label5")); selectItems.add(new BeanItems("value6", "label6")); selectItems.add(new BeanItems("value7", "label7")); selectItems.add(new BeanItems("value8", "label8")); selectItems.add(new BeanItems("value9", "label9")); selectItems.add(new BeanItems("value10", "label10")); } return selectItems; } /** * @return the selectItemsone */ public List<BeanItems> getSelectItemsone() { if (selectItemsone == null) { selectItemsone = new ArrayList<BeanItems>(); selectItemsone.add(new BeanItems("value1", "label1")); selectItemsone.add(new BeanItems("value2", "label2")); selectItemsone.add(new BeanItems("value3", "label3")); } return selectItemsone; } My Converter Class enter code here public Object getAsObject(FacesContext context, UIComponent component,String value) { int index = value.indexOf(':'); return new BeanItems(value.substring(0, index), value.substring(index + 1)); } public String getAsString(FacesContext context, UIComponent component,Object value) { BeanItems beanItems = (BeanItems) value; return beanItems.getValue() + ":" + beanItems.getData(); } My BeanItems Class enter code here private String data; //Getter & setter private String value; //Getter & setter public BeanItems() { } public BeanItems(String value, String data) { this.value = value; this.data = data; } public int hashCode() { final int prime = 31; int result = 1; result = prime * result + ((data == null) ? 0 : data.hashCode()); result = prime * result + ((value == null) ? 0 : value.hashCode()); return result; } public boolean equals(Object obj) { if (this == obj) return true; if (obj == null) return false; if (getClass() != obj.getClass()) return false; final BeanItems other = (BeanItems) obj; if (data == null) { if (other.data != null) return false; } else if (!data.equals(other.data)) return false; if (value == null) { if (other.value != null) return false; } else if (!value.equals(other.value)) return false; return true; }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  | Next Page >