Am I remembering incorrectly, or did Java, once upon a time, provide a Pair class as part of its API?
This question is related to
java
The answer is
A Pair class :
public class Pair<K, V> {
private final K element0;
private final V element1;
public static <K, V> Pair<K, V> createPair(K element0, V element1) {
return new Pair<K, V>(element0, element1);
}
public Pair(K element0, V element1) {
this.element0 = element0;
this.element1 = element1;
}
public K getElement0() {
return element0;
}
public V getElement1() {
return element1;
}
}
usage :
Pair<Integer, String> pair = Pair.createPair(1, "test");
pair.getElement0();
pair.getElement1();
Immutable, only a pair !
No, but it's been requested many times.
Many 3rd party libraries have their versions of Pair, but Java has never had such a class. The closest is the inner interface java.util.Map.Entry, which exposes an immutable key property and a possibly mutable value property.
Map.Entry
Java 1.6 and upper have two implementation of Map.Entry interface pairing a key with a value:
For example
Map.Entry < Month, Boolean > pair =
new AbstractMap.SimpleImmutableEntry <>(
Month.AUGUST ,
Boolean.TRUE
)
;
pair.toString(): AUGUST=true
I use it when need to store pairs (like size and object collection).
This piece from my production code:
public Map<L1Risk, Map.Entry<int[], Map<L2Risk, Map.Entry<int[], Map<L3Risk, List<Event>>>>>>
getEventTable(RiskClassifier classifier) {
Map<L1Risk, Map.Entry<int[], Map<L2Risk, Map.Entry<int[], Map<L3Risk, List<Event>>>>>> l1s = new HashMap<>();
Map<L2Risk, Map.Entry<int[], Map<L3Risk, List<Event>>>> l2s = new HashMap<>();
Map<L3Risk, List<Event>> l3s = new HashMap<>();
List<Event> events = new ArrayList<>();
...
map.put(l3s, events);
map.put(l2s, new AbstractMap.SimpleImmutableEntry<>(l3Size, l3s));
map.put(l1s, new AbstractMap.SimpleImmutableEntry<>(l2Size, l2s));
}
Code looks complicated but instead of Map.Entry you limited to array of object (with size 2) and lose type checks...
If you want a pair (not supposedly key-value pair) just to hold two generic data together neither of the solutions above really handy since first (or so called Key) cannot be changed (neither in Apache Commons Lang's Pair nor in AbstractMap.SimpleEntry). They have thier own reasons, but still you may need to be able to change both of the components. Here is a Pair class in which both elements can be set
public class Pair<First, Second> {
private First first;
private Second second;
public Pair(First first, Second second) {
this.first = first;
this.second = second;
}
public void setFirst(First first) {
this.first = first;
}
public void setSecond(Second second) {
this.second = second;
}
public First getFirst() {
return first;
}
public Second getSecond() {
return second;
}
public void set(First first, Second second) {
setFirst(first);
setSecond(second);
}
@Override
public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (this == o) return true;
if (o == null || getClass() != o.getClass()) return false;
Pair pair = (Pair) o;
if (first != null ? !first.equals(pair.first) : pair.first != null) return false;
if (second != null ? !second.equals(pair.second) : pair.second != null) return false;
return true;
}
@Override
public int hashCode() {
int result = first != null ? first.hashCode() : 0;
result = 31 * result + (second != null ? second.hashCode() : 0);
return result;
}
}
This should help.
To sum it up: a generic Pair class doesn't have any special semantics and you could as well need a Tripplet class etc. The developers of Java thus didn't include a generic Pair but suggest to write special classes (which isn't that hard) like Point(x,y), Range(start, end) or Map.Entry(key, value).
There are lots of implementation around here, but all the time something is missing , the Override of equal and hash method.
here is a more complete version of this class:
/**
* Container to ease passing around a tuple of two objects. This object provides a sensible
* implementation of equals(), returning true if equals() is true on each of the contained
* objects.
*/
public class Pair<F, S> {
public final F first;
public final S second;
/**
* Constructor for a Pair.
*
* @param first the first object in the Pair
* @param second the second object in the pair
*/
public Pair(F first, S second) {
this.first = first;
this.second = second;
}
/**
* Checks the two objects for equality by delegating to their respective
* {@link Object#equals(Object)} methods.
*
* @param o the {@link Pair} to which this one is to be checked for equality
* @return true if the underlying objects of the Pair are both considered
* equal
*/
@Override
public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (!(o instanceof Pair)) {
return false;
}
Pair<?, ?> p = (Pair<?, ?>) o;
return Objects.equals(p.first, first) && Objects.equals(p.second, second);
}
/**
* Compute a hash code using the hash codes of the underlying objects
*
* @return a hashcode of the Pair
*/
@Override
public int hashCode() {
return (first == null ? 0 : first.hashCode()) ^ (second == null ? 0 : second.hashCode());
}
/**
* Convenience method for creating an appropriately typed pair.
* @param a the first object in the Pair
* @param b the second object in the pair
* @return a Pair that is templatized with the types of a and b
*/
public static <A, B> Pair <A, B> create(A a, B b) {
return new Pair<A, B>(a, b);
}
}
No but JavaFX has it.
It does seem odd. I found this thread, also thinking I'd seen one in the past, but couldn't find it in Javadoc.
I can see the Java developers' point about using specialised classes, and that the presence of a generic Pair class could cause developers to be lazy (perish the thought!)
However, in my experience, there are undoubtedly times when the thing you're modelling really is just a pair of things and coming up with a meaningful name for the relationship between the two halves of the pair, is actually more painful than just getting on with it. So instead, we're left to create a 'bespoke' class of practically boiler-plate code - probably called 'Pair'.
This could be a slippery slope, but a Pair and a Triplet class would cover a very large proportion of the use-cases.
Source: Stackoverflow.com