I am having the below code
trainResponse.getIds().stream()
.filter(id -> id.getType().equalsIgnoreCase("Company"))
.findFirst()
.ifPresent(id -> {
domainResp.setId(id.getId());
});
trainResponse.getIds().stream()
.filter(id -> id.getType().equalsIgnoreCase("Private"))
.findFirst()
.ifPresent(id ->
domainResp.setPrivateId(id.getId())
);
Here I'm iterating/streaming the list of Id objects 2 times.
The only difference between the two streams is in the filter() operation.
How to achieve it in single iteration, and what is the best approach (in terms of time and space complexity) to do this?
You can achieve that with Stream IPA in one pass though the given set of data and without increasing memory consumption (i.e. the result will contain only ids having required attributes).
For that, you can create a custom Collector that will expect as its parameters a Collection attributes to look for and a Function responsible for extracting the attribute from the stream element.
That's how this generic collector could be implemented.
/** *
* #param <T> - the type of stream elements
* #param <F> - the type of the key (a field of the stream element)
*/
class CollectByKey<T, F> implements Collector<T, Map<F, T>, Map<F, T>> {
private final Set<F> keys;
private final Function<T, F> keyExtractor;
public CollectByKey(Collection<F> keys, Function<T, F> keyExtractor) {
this.keys = new HashSet<>(keys);
this.keyExtractor = keyExtractor;
}
#Override
public Supplier<Map<F, T>> supplier() {
return HashMap::new;
}
#Override
public BiConsumer<Map<F, T>, T> accumulator() {
return this::tryAdd;
}
private void tryAdd(Map<F, T> map, T item) {
F key = keyExtractor.apply(item);
if (keys.remove(key)) {
map.put(key, item);
}
}
#Override
public BinaryOperator<Map<F, T>> combiner() {
return this::tryCombine;
}
private Map<F, T> tryCombine(Map<F, T> left, Map<F, T> right) {
right.forEach(left::putIfAbsent);
return left;
}
#Override
public Function<Map<F, T>, Map<F, T>> finisher() {
return Function.identity();
}
#Override
public Set<Characteristics> characteristics() {
return Collections.emptySet();
}
}
main() - demo (dummy Id class is not shown)
public class CustomCollectorByGivenAttributes {
public static void main(String[] args) {
List<Id> ids = List.of(new Id(1, "Company"), new Id(2, "Fizz"),
new Id(3, "Private"), new Id(4, "Buzz"));
Map<String, Id> idByType = ids.stream()
.collect(new CollectByKey<>(List.of("Company", "Private"), Id::getType));
idByType.forEach((k, v) -> {
if (k.equalsIgnoreCase("Company")) domainResp.setId(v);
if (k.equalsIgnoreCase("Private")) domainResp.setPrivateId(v);
});
System.out.println(idByType.keySet()); // printing keys - added for demo purposes
}
}
Output
[Company, Private]
Note, after the set of keys becomes empty (i.e. all resulting data has been fetched) the further elements of the stream will get ignored, but still all remained data is required to be processed.
IMO, the two streams solution is the most readable. And it may even be the most efficient solution using streams.
IMO, the best way to avoid multiple streams is to use a classical loop. For example:
// There may be bugs ...
boolean seenCompany = false;
boolean seenPrivate = false;
for (Id id: getIds()) {
if (!seenCompany && id.getType().equalsIgnoreCase("Company")) {
domainResp.setId(id.getId());
seenCompany = true;
} else if (!seenPrivate && id.getType().equalsIgnoreCase("Private")) {
domainResp.setPrivateId(id.getId());
seenPrivate = true;
}
if (seenCompany && seenPrivate) {
break;
}
}
It is unclear whether that is more efficient to performing one iteration or two iterations. It will depend on the class returned by getIds() and the code of iteration.
The complicated stuff with two flags is how you replicate the short circuiting behavior of findFirst() in your 2 stream solution. I don't know if it is possible to do that at all using one stream. If you can, it will involve something pretty cunning code.
But as you can see your original solution with 2 stream is clearly easier to understand than the above.
The main point of using streams is to make your code simpler. It is not about efficiency. When you try to do complicated things to make the streams more efficient, you are probably defeating the (true) purpose of using streams in the first place.
For your list of ids, you could just use a map, then assign them after retrieving, if present.
Map<String, Integer> seen = new HashMap<>();
for (Id id : ids) {
if (seen.size() == 2) {
break;
}
seen.computeIfAbsent(id.getType().toLowerCase(), v->id.getId());
}
If you want to test it, you can use the following:
record Id(String getType, int getId) {
#Override
public String toString() {
return String.format("[%s,%s]", getType, getId);
}
}
Random r = new Random();
List<Id> ids = r.ints(20, 1, 100)
.mapToObj(id -> new Id(
r.nextBoolean() ? "Company" : "Private", id))
.toList();
Edited to allow only certain types to be checked
If you have more than two types but only want to check on certain ones, you can do it as follows.
the process is the same except you have a Set of allowed types.
You simply check to see that your are processing one of those types by using contains.
Map<String, Integer> seen = new HashMap<>();
Set<String> allowedTypes = Set.of("company", "private");
for (Id id : ids) {
String type = id.getType();
if (allowedTypes.contains(type.toLowerCase())) {
if (seen.size() == allowedTypes.size()) {
break;
}
seen.computeIfAbsent(type,
v -> id.getId());
}
}
Testing is similar except that additional types need to be included.
create a list of some types that could be present.
and build a list of them as before.
notice that the size of allowed types replaces the value 2 to permit more than two types to be checked before exiting the loop.
List<String> possibleTypes =
List.of("Company", "Type1", "Private", "Type2");
Random r = new Random();
List<Id> ids =
r.ints(30, 1, 100)
.mapToObj(id -> new Id(possibleTypes.get(
r.nextInt((possibleTypes.size()))),
id))
.toList();
You can group by type and check the resulting map.
I suppose the type of ids is IdType.
Map<String, List<IdType>> map = trainResponse.getIds()
.stream()
.collect(Collectors.groupingBy(
id -> id.getType().toLowerCase()));
Optional.ofNullable(map.get("company")).ifPresent(ids -> domainResp.setId(ids.get(0).getId()));
Optional.ofNullable(map.get("private")).ifPresent(ids -> domainResp.setPrivateId(ids.get(0).getId()));
I'd recommend a traditionnal for loop. In addition of being easily scalable, this prevents you from traversing the collection multiple times.
Your code looks like something that'll be generalised in the future, thus my generic approch.
Here's some pseudo code (with errors, just for the sake of illustration)
Set<String> matches = new TreeSet<>(String.CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER);
for(id : trainResponse.getIds()) {
if (! matches.add(id.getType())) {
continue;
}
switch (id.getType().toLowerCase()) {
case "company":
domainResp.setId(id.getId());
break;
case "private":
...
}
}
Something along these lines can might work, it would go through the whole stream though, and won't stop at the first occurrence.
But assuming a small stream and only one Id for each type, why not?
Map<String, Consumer<String>> setters = new HashMap<>();
setters.put("Company", domainResp::setId);
setters.put("Private", domainResp::setPrivateId);
trainResponse.getIds().forEach(id -> {
if (setters.containsKey(id.getType())) {
setters.get(id.getType()).accept(id.getId());
}
});
We can use the Collectors.filtering from Java 9 onwards to collect the values based on condition.
For this scenario, I have changed code like below
final Map<String, String> results = trainResponse.getIds()
.stream()
.collect(Collectors.filtering(
id -> id.getType().equals("Company") || id.getIdContext().equals("Private"),
Collectors.toMap(Id::getType, Id::getId, (first, second) -> first)));
And getting the id from results Map.
Can anyone please point me in the right direction as I cannot understand the issue.
I am executing following method.
private static void reduce_parallelStream() {
List<String> vals = Arrays.asList("a", "b");
List<String> join = vals.parallelStream().reduce(new ArrayList<String>(),
(List<String> l, String v) -> {
l.add(v);
return l;
}, (a, b) -> {
a.addAll(b);
return a;
}
);
System.out.println(join);
}
It prints
[null, a, null, a]
I cannot understand why does it put two null in the resultant list. I expected the answer to be
[a, b]
as it is a parallel stream so the first parameter to reduce
new ArrayList()
would probably be called twice for each input value a and b.
Then the accumulator function would probably be called twice as it is a parallelStream and pass each input "a and b" in each call along with the lists provided by seeded value. So a is added to list 1 and b is added to list 2 (or vice versa). Afterwards the combinator will combine both lists but it doesn't happen.
Interestingly, if I put a print statement inside my accumulator to print the value of input, the output changes. So following
private static void reduce_parallelStream() {
List<String> vals = Arrays.asList("a", "b");
List<String> join = vals.parallelStream().reduce(new ArrayList<String>(),
(List<String> l, String v) -> {
System.out.printf("l is %s", l);
l.add(v);
System.out.printf("l is %s", l);
return l;
}, (a, b) -> {
a.addAll(b);
return a;
}
);
System.out.println(join);
}
results in this output
l is []l is [b]l is [b, a]l is [b, a][b, a, b, a]
Can anyone please explain.
You should be using Collections.synchronizedList() when working with parallelStream(). Because ArrayList is not threadsafe and you get unexpected behavior when accessing it concurrently, like you're doing it with parallelStream().
I have modified your code and now it's working correctly:
private static void reduce_parallelStream() {
List<String> vals = Arrays.asList("a", "b");
// Use Synchronized List when with parallelStream()
List<String> join = vals.parallelStream().reduce(Collections.synchronizedList(new ArrayList<>()),
(l, v) -> {
l.add(v);
return l;
}, (a, b) -> a // don't use addAll() here to multiplicate the output like [a, b, a, b]
);
System.out.println(join);
}
Output:
Sometimes you'll get this output:
[a, b]
And sometimes this one:
[b, a]
Reason for this is that it's a parallelStream() so you can't be sure about the order of execution.
as it is a parallel stream so the first parameter to reduce new ArrayList()
would probably be called twice for each input value a and b.
That's where you are wrong. The first parameter is a single ArrayList instance, not a lambda expression can produce multiple ArrayList instances.
Therefore, the entire reduction operates on a single ArrayList instance. When multiple threads modify that ArrayList in parallel, the results may change in each execution.
Your combiner actually adds all the elements of a List to the same List.
You can obtain the expected [a,b] output if both the accumulator and combiner functions will produce a new ArrayList instead of mutating their input ArrayList:
List<String> join = vals.parallelStream().reduce(
new ArrayList<String>(),
(List<String> l, String v) -> {
List<String> cl = new ArrayList<>(l);
cl.add(v);
return cl;
}, (a, b) -> {
List<String> ca = new ArrayList<>(a);
ca.addAll(b);
return ca;
}
);
That said, you shouldn't be using reduce at all. collect is the correct way to perform a mutable reduction:
List<String> join = vals.parallelStream()
.collect(ArrayList::new,ArrayList::add,ArrayList::addAll);
As you can see, here, unlike in reduce, the first parameter you pass is a Supplier<ArrayList<String>>, which can be used to generate as many intermediate ArrayList instances as necessary.
It is rather simple, the first argument is the identity or I would say zero to start with. For parallelStream usage this value is reused. That means concurrency problems (the null from an add) and duplicates.
This can be patched by:
final ArrayList<String> zero = new ArrayList<>();
List<String> join = vals.parallelStream().reduce(zero,
(List<String> l, String v) -> {
if (l == zero) {
l = new ArrayList<>();
}
l.add(v);
return l;
}, (a, b) -> {
// See comment of Holger:
if (a == zero) return b;
if (b == zero) return a;
a.addAll(b);
return a;
}
);
Safe.
You might wonder why reduce has no overload for an identity providing function.
The reason is that collect should have been used here.
I've tested a bit the max function on Java 8 lambdas and streams, and it seems that in case max is executed, even if more than one object compares to 0, it returns an arbitrary element within the tied candidates without further consideration.
Is there an evident trick or function for such a max expected behavior, so that all max values are returned? I don't see anything in the API but I am sure it must exist something better than comparing manually.
For instance:
// myComparator is an IntegerComparator
Stream.of(1, 3, 5, 3, 2, 3, 5)
.max(myComparator)
.forEach(System.out::println);
// Would print 5, 5 in any order.
I believe the OP is using a Comparator to partition the input into equivalence classes, and the desired result is a list of members of the equivalence class that is the maximum according to that Comparator.
Unfortunately, using int values as a sample problem is a terrible example. All equal int values are fungible, so there is no notion of preserving the ordering of equivalent values. Perhaps a better example is using string lengths, where the desired result is to return a list of strings from an input that all have the longest length within that input.
I don't know of any way to do this without storing at least partial results in a collection.
Given an input collection, say
List<String> list = ... ;
...it's simple enough to do this in two passes, the first to get the longest length, and the second to filter the strings that have that length:
int longest = list.stream()
.mapToInt(String::length)
.max()
.orElse(-1);
List<String> result = list.stream()
.filter(s -> s.length() == longest)
.collect(toList());
If the input is a stream, which cannot be traversed more than once, it is possible to compute the result in only a single pass using a collector. Writing such a collector isn't difficult, but it is a bit tedious as there are several cases to be handled. A helper function that generates such a collector, given a Comparator, is as follows:
static <T> Collector<T,?,List<T>> maxList(Comparator<? super T> comp) {
return Collector.of(
ArrayList::new,
(list, t) -> {
int c;
if (list.isEmpty() || (c = comp.compare(t, list.get(0))) == 0) {
list.add(t);
} else if (c > 0) {
list.clear();
list.add(t);
}
},
(list1, list2) -> {
if (list1.isEmpty()) {
return list2;
}
if (list2.isEmpty()) {
return list1;
}
int r = comp.compare(list1.get(0), list2.get(0));
if (r < 0) {
return list2;
} else if (r > 0) {
return list1;
} else {
list1.addAll(list2);
return list1;
}
});
}
This stores intermediate results in an ArrayList. The invariant is that all elements within any such list are equivalent in terms of the Comparator. When adding an element, if it's less than the elements in the list, it's ignored; if it's equal, it's added; and if it's greater, the list is emptied and the new element is added. Merging isn't too difficult either: the list with the greater elements is returned, but if their elements are equal the lists are appended.
Given an input stream, this is pretty easy to use:
Stream<String> input = ... ;
List<String> result = input.collect(maxList(comparing(String::length)));
I would group by value and store the values into a TreeMap in order to have my values sorted, then I would get the max value by getting the last entry as next:
Stream.of(1, 3, 5, 3, 2, 3, 5)
.collect(groupingBy(Function.identity(), TreeMap::new, toList()))
.lastEntry()
.getValue()
.forEach(System.out::println);
Output:
5
5
I implemented more generic collector solution with custom downstream collector. Probably some readers might find it useful:
public static <T, A, D> Collector<T, ?, D> maxAll(Comparator<? super T> comparator,
Collector<? super T, A, D> downstream) {
Supplier<A> downstreamSupplier = downstream.supplier();
BiConsumer<A, ? super T> downstreamAccumulator = downstream.accumulator();
BinaryOperator<A> downstreamCombiner = downstream.combiner();
class Container {
A acc;
T obj;
boolean hasAny;
Container(A acc) {
this.acc = acc;
}
}
Supplier<Container> supplier = () -> new Container(downstreamSupplier.get());
BiConsumer<Container, T> accumulator = (acc, t) -> {
if(!acc.hasAny) {
downstreamAccumulator.accept(acc.acc, t);
acc.obj = t;
acc.hasAny = true;
} else {
int cmp = comparator.compare(t, acc.obj);
if (cmp > 0) {
acc.acc = downstreamSupplier.get();
acc.obj = t;
}
if (cmp >= 0)
downstreamAccumulator.accept(acc.acc, t);
}
};
BinaryOperator<Container> combiner = (acc1, acc2) -> {
if (!acc2.hasAny) {
return acc1;
}
if (!acc1.hasAny) {
return acc2;
}
int cmp = comparator.compare(acc1.obj, acc2.obj);
if (cmp > 0) {
return acc1;
}
if (cmp < 0) {
return acc2;
}
acc1.acc = downstreamCombiner.apply(acc1.acc, acc2.acc);
return acc1;
};
Function<Container, D> finisher = acc -> downstream.finisher().apply(acc.acc);
return Collector.of(supplier, accumulator, combiner, finisher);
}
So by default it can be collected to a list using:
public static <T> Collector<T, ?, List<T>> maxAll(Comparator<? super T> comparator) {
return maxAll(comparator, Collectors.toList());
}
But you can use other downstream collectors as well:
public static String joinLongestStrings(Collection<String> input) {
return input.stream().collect(
maxAll(Comparator.comparingInt(String::length), Collectors.joining(","))));
}
If I understood well, you want the frequency of the max value in the Stream.
One way to achieve that would be to store the results in a TreeMap<Integer, List<Integer> when you collect elements from the Stream. Then you grab the last key (or first depending on the comparator you give) to get the value which will contains the list of max values.
List<Integer> maxValues = st.collect(toMap(i -> i,
Arrays::asList,
(l1, l2) -> Stream.concat(l1.stream(), l2.stream()).collect(toList()),
TreeMap::new))
.lastEntry()
.getValue();
Collecting it from the Stream(4, 5, -2, 5, 5) will give you a List [5, 5, 5].
Another approach in the same spirit would be to use a group by operation combined with the counting() collector:
Entry<Integer, Long> maxValues = st.collect(groupingBy(i -> i,
TreeMap::new,
counting())).lastEntry(); //5=3 -> 5 appears 3 times
Basically you firstly get a Map<Integer, List<Integer>>. Then the downstream counting() collector will return the number of elements in each list mapped by its key resulting in a Map. From there you grab the max entry.
The first approaches require to store all the elements from the stream. The second one is better (see Holger's comment) as the intermediate List is not built. In both approached, the result is computed in a single pass.
If you get the source from a collection, you may want to use Collections.max one time to find the maximum value followed by Collections.frequency to find how many times this value appears.
It requires two passes but uses less memory as you don't have to build the data-structure.
The stream equivalent would be coll.stream().max(...).get(...) followed by coll.stream().filter(...).count().
I'm not really sure whether you are trying to
(a) find the number of occurrences of the maximum item, or
(b) Find all the maximum values in the case of a Comparator that is not consistent with equals.
An example of (a) would be [1, 5, 4, 5, 1, 1] -> [5, 5].
An example of (b) would be:
Stream.of("Bar", "FOO", "foo", "BAR", "Foo")
.max((s, t) -> s.toLowerCase().compareTo(t.toLowerCase()));
which you want to give [Foo, foo, Foo], rather than just FOO or Optional[FOO].
In both cases, there are clever ways to do it in just one pass. But these approaches are of dubious value because you would need to keep track of unnecessary information along the way. For example, if you start with [2, 0, 2, 2, 1, 6, 2], it would only be when you reach 6 that you would realise it was not necessary to track all the 2s.
I think the best approach is the obvious one; use max, and then iterate the items again putting all the ties into a collection of your choice. This will work for both (a) and (b).
If you'd rather rely on a library than the other answers here, StreamEx has a collector to do this.
Stream.of(1, 3, 5, 3, 2, 3, 5)
.collect(MoreCollectors.maxAll())
.forEach(System.out::println);
There's a version which takes a Comparator too for streams of items which don't have a natural ordering (i.e. don't implement Comparable).
System.out.println(
Stream.of(1, 3, 5, 3, 2, 3, 5)
.map(a->new Integer[]{a})
.reduce((a,b)->
a[0]==b[0]?
Stream.concat(Stream.of(a),Stream.of(b)).toArray() :
a[0]>b[0]? a:b
).get()
)
I was searching for a good answer on this question, but a tad more complex and couldn't find anything until I figured it out myself, which is why I'm posting if this helps anybody.
I have a list of Kittens.
Kitten is an object which has a name, age and gender. I had to return a list of all the youngest kittens.
For example:
So kitten list would contain kitten objects (k1, k2, k3, k4) and their ages would be (1, 2, 3, 1) accordingly. We want to return [k1, k4], because they are both the youngest. If only one youngest exists, the function should return [k1(youngest)].
Find the min value of the list (if it exists):
Optional<Kitten> minKitten = kittens.stream().min(Comparator.comparingInt(Kitten::getAge));
filter the list by the min value
return minKitten.map(value -> kittens.stream().filter(kitten -> kitten.getAge() == value.getAge())
.collect(Collectors.toList())).orElse(Collections.emptyList());
The following two lines will do it without implementing a separate comparator:
List<Integer> list = List.of(1, 3, 5, 3, 2, 3, 5);
list.stream().filter(i -> i == (list.stream().max(Comparator.comparingInt(i2 -> i2))).get()).forEach(System.out::println);
General question: What's the proper way to reverse a stream? Assuming that we don't know what type of elements that stream consists of, what's the generic way to reverse any stream?
Specific question:
IntStream provides range method to generate Integers in specific range IntStream.range(-range, 0), now that I want to reverse it switching range from 0 to negative won't work, also I can't use Integer::compare
List<Integer> list = Arrays.asList(1,2,3,4);
list.stream().sorted(Integer::compare).forEach(System.out::println);
with IntStream I'll get this compiler error
Error:(191, 0) ajc: The method sorted() in the type IntStream is not applicable for the arguments (Integer::compare)
what am I missing here?
For the specific question of generating a reverse IntStream, try something like this:
static IntStream revRange(int from, int to) {
return IntStream.range(from, to)
.map(i -> to - i + from - 1);
}
This avoids boxing and sorting.
For the general question of how to reverse a stream of any type, I don't know of there's a "proper" way. There are a couple ways I can think of. Both end up storing the stream elements. I don't know of a way to reverse a stream without storing the elements.
This first way stores the elements into an array and reads them out to a stream in reverse order. Note that since we don't know the runtime type of the stream elements, we can't type the array properly, requiring an unchecked cast.
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
static <T> Stream<T> reverse(Stream<T> input) {
Object[] temp = input.toArray();
return (Stream<T>) IntStream.range(0, temp.length)
.mapToObj(i -> temp[temp.length - i - 1]);
}
Another technique uses collectors to accumulate the items into a reversed list. This does lots of insertions at the front of ArrayList objects, so there's lots of copying going on.
Stream<T> input = ... ;
List<T> output =
input.collect(ArrayList::new,
(list, e) -> list.add(0, e),
(list1, list2) -> list1.addAll(0, list2));
It's probably possible to write a much more efficient reversing collector using some kind of customized data structure.
UPDATE 2016-01-29
Since this question has gotten a bit of attention recently, I figure I should update my answer to solve the problem with inserting at the front of ArrayList. This will be horribly inefficient with a large number of elements, requiring O(N^2) copying.
It's preferable to use an ArrayDeque instead, which efficiently supports insertion at the front. A small wrinkle is that we can't use the three-arg form of Stream.collect(); it requires the contents of the second arg be merged into the first arg, and there's no "add-all-at-front" bulk operation on Deque. Instead, we use addAll() to append the contents of the first arg to the end of the second, and then we return the second. This requires using the Collector.of() factory method.
The complete code is this:
Deque<String> output =
input.collect(Collector.of(
ArrayDeque::new,
(deq, t) -> deq.addFirst(t),
(d1, d2) -> { d2.addAll(d1); return d2; }));
The result is a Deque instead of a List, but that shouldn't be much of an issue, as it can easily be iterated or streamed in the now-reversed order.
Elegant solution
List<Integer> list = Arrays.asList(1,2,3,4);
list.stream()
.sorted(Collections.reverseOrder()) // Method on Stream<Integer>
.forEach(System.out::println);
General Question:
Stream does not store any elements.
So iterating elements in the reverse order is not possible without storing the elements in some intermediate collection.
Stream.of("1", "2", "20", "3")
.collect(Collectors.toCollection(ArrayDeque::new)) // or LinkedList
.descendingIterator()
.forEachRemaining(System.out::println);
Update: Changed LinkedList to ArrayDeque (better) see here for details
Prints:
3
20
2
1
By the way, using sort method is not correct as it sorts, NOT reverses (assuming stream may have unordered elements)
Specific Question:
I found this simple, easier and intuitive(Copied #Holger comment)
IntStream.iterate(to - 1, i -> i - 1).limit(to - from)
Many of the solutions here sort or reverse the IntStream, but that unnecessarily requires intermediate storage. Stuart Marks's solution is the way to go:
static IntStream revRange(int from, int to) {
return IntStream.range(from, to).map(i -> to - i + from - 1);
}
It correctly handles overflow as well, passing this test:
#Test
public void testRevRange() {
assertArrayEquals(revRange(0, 5).toArray(), new int[]{4, 3, 2, 1, 0});
assertArrayEquals(revRange(-5, 0).toArray(), new int[]{-1, -2, -3, -4, -5});
assertArrayEquals(revRange(1, 4).toArray(), new int[]{3, 2, 1});
assertArrayEquals(revRange(0, 0).toArray(), new int[0]);
assertArrayEquals(revRange(0, -1).toArray(), new int[0]);
assertArrayEquals(revRange(MIN_VALUE, MIN_VALUE).toArray(), new int[0]);
assertArrayEquals(revRange(MAX_VALUE, MAX_VALUE).toArray(), new int[0]);
assertArrayEquals(revRange(MIN_VALUE, MIN_VALUE + 1).toArray(), new int[]{MIN_VALUE});
assertArrayEquals(revRange(MAX_VALUE - 1, MAX_VALUE).toArray(), new int[]{MAX_VALUE - 1});
}
How NOT to do it:
Don't use .sorted(Comparator.reverseOrder()) or .sorted(Collections.reverseOrder()), because it will just sort elements in the descending order.
Using it for given Integer input:
[1, 4, 2, 5, 3]
the output would be as follows:
[5, 4, 3, 2, 1]
For String input:
["A", "D", "B", "E", "C"]
the output would be as follows:
[E, D, C, B, A]
Don't use .sorted((a, b) -> -1) (explanation at the end)
The easiest way to do it properly:
List<Integer> list = Arrays.asList(1, 4, 2, 5, 3);
Collections.reverse(list);
System.out.println(list);
Output:
[3, 5, 2, 4, 1]
The same for String:
List<String> stringList = Arrays.asList("A", "D", "B", "E", "C");
Collections.reverse(stringList);
System.out.println(stringList);
Output:
[C, E, B, D, A]
Don't use .sorted((a, b) -> -1)!
It breaks comparator contract and might work only for some cases ie. only on single thread but not in parallel.
yankee explanation:
(a, b) -> -1 breaks the contract for Comparator. Whether this works depends on the implementation of the sort algorithm. The next release of the JVM might break this. Actually I can already break this reproduciblly on my machine using IntStream.range(0, 10000).parallel().boxed().sorted((a, b) -> -1).forEachOrdered(System.out::println);
//Don't use this!!!
List<Integer> list = Arrays.asList(1, 4, 2, 5, 3);
List<Integer> reversedList = list.stream()
.sorted((a, b) -> -1)
.collect(Collectors.toList());
System.out.println(reversedList);
Output in positive case:
[3, 5, 2, 4, 1]
Possible output in parallel stream or with other JVM implementation:
[4, 1, 2, 3, 5]
The same for String:
//Don't use this!!!
List<String> stringList = Arrays.asList("A", "D", "B", "E", "C");
List<String> reversedStringList = stringList.stream()
.sorted((a, b) -> -1)
.collect(Collectors.toList());
System.out.println(reversedStringList);
Output in positive case:
[C, E, B, D, A]
Possible output in parallel stream or with other JVM implementation:
[A, E, B, D, C]
without external lib...
import java.util.List;
import java.util.Collections;
import java.util.stream.Collector;
public class MyCollectors {
public static <T> Collector<T, ?, List<T>> toListReversed() {
return Collectors.collectingAndThen(Collectors.toList(), l -> {
Collections.reverse(l);
return l;
});
}
}
If implemented Comparable<T> (ex. Integer, String, Date), you can do it using Comparator.reverseOrder().
List<Integer> list = Arrays.asList(1, 2, 3, 4);
list.stream()
.sorted(Comparator.reverseOrder())
.forEach(System.out::println);
You could define your own collector that collects the elements in reverse order:
public static <T> Collector<T, List<T>, List<T>> inReverse() {
return Collector.of(
ArrayList::new,
(l, t) -> l.add(t),
(l, r) -> {l.addAll(r); return l;},
Lists::<T>reverse);
}
And use it like:
stream.collect(inReverse()).forEach(t -> ...)
I use an ArrayList in forward order to efficiently insert collect the items (at the end of the list), and Guava Lists.reverse to efficiently give a reversed view of the list without making another copy of it.
Here are some test cases for the custom collector:
import static org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat;
import static org.hamcrest.Matchers.*;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.function.BiConsumer;
import java.util.function.BinaryOperator;
import java.util.function.Function;
import java.util.function.Supplier;
import java.util.stream.Collector;
import org.hamcrest.Matchers;
import org.junit.Test;
import com.google.common.collect.Lists;
public class TestReverseCollector {
private final Object t1 = new Object();
private final Object t2 = new Object();
private final Object t3 = new Object();
private final Object t4 = new Object();
private final Collector<Object, List<Object>, List<Object>> inReverse = inReverse();
private final Supplier<List<Object>> supplier = inReverse.supplier();
private final BiConsumer<List<Object>, Object> accumulator = inReverse.accumulator();
private final Function<List<Object>, List<Object>> finisher = inReverse.finisher();
private final BinaryOperator<List<Object>> combiner = inReverse.combiner();
#Test public void associative() {
final List<Object> a1 = supplier.get();
accumulator.accept(a1, t1);
accumulator.accept(a1, t2);
final List<Object> r1 = finisher.apply(a1);
final List<Object> a2 = supplier.get();
accumulator.accept(a2, t1);
final List<Object> a3 = supplier.get();
accumulator.accept(a3, t2);
final List<Object> r2 = finisher.apply(combiner.apply(a2, a3));
assertThat(r1, Matchers.equalTo(r2));
}
#Test public void identity() {
final List<Object> a1 = supplier.get();
accumulator.accept(a1, t1);
accumulator.accept(a1, t2);
final List<Object> r1 = finisher.apply(a1);
final List<Object> a2 = supplier.get();
accumulator.accept(a2, t1);
accumulator.accept(a2, t2);
final List<Object> r2 = finisher.apply(combiner.apply(a2, supplier.get()));
assertThat(r1, equalTo(r2));
}
#Test public void reversing() throws Exception {
final List<Object> a2 = supplier.get();
accumulator.accept(a2, t1);
accumulator.accept(a2, t2);
final List<Object> a3 = supplier.get();
accumulator.accept(a3, t3);
accumulator.accept(a3, t4);
final List<Object> r2 = finisher.apply(combiner.apply(a2, a3));
assertThat(r2, contains(t4, t3, t2, t1));
}
public static <T> Collector<T, List<T>, List<T>> inReverse() {
return Collector.of(
ArrayList::new,
(l, t) -> l.add(t),
(l, r) -> {l.addAll(r); return l;},
Lists::<T>reverse);
}
}
cyclops-react StreamUtils has a reverse Stream method (javadoc).
StreamUtils.reverse(Stream.of("1", "2", "20", "3"))
.forEach(System.out::println);
It works by collecting to an ArrayList and then making use of the ListIterator class which can iterate in either direction, to iterate backwards over the list.
If you already have a List, it will be more efficient
StreamUtils.reversedStream(Arrays.asList("1", "2", "20", "3"))
.forEach(System.out::println);
Here's the solution I've come up with:
private static final Comparator<Integer> BY_ASCENDING_ORDER = Integer::compare;
private static final Comparator<Integer> BY_DESCENDING_ORDER = BY_ASCENDING_ORDER.reversed();
then using those comparators:
IntStream.range(-range, 0).boxed().sorted(BY_DESCENDING_ORDER).forEach(// etc...
I would suggest using jOOλ, it's a great library that adds lots of useful functionality to Java 8 streams and lambdas.
You can then do the following:
List<Integer> list = Arrays.asList(1,2,3,4);
Seq.seq(list).reverse().forEach(System.out::println)
Simple as that. It's a pretty lightweight library, and well worth adding to any Java 8 project.
How about this utility method?
public static <T> Stream<T> getReverseStream(List<T> list) {
final ListIterator<T> listIt = list.listIterator(list.size());
final Iterator<T> reverseIterator = new Iterator<T>() {
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
return listIt.hasPrevious();
}
#Override
public T next() {
return listIt.previous();
}
};
return StreamSupport.stream(Spliterators.spliteratorUnknownSize(
reverseIterator,
Spliterator.ORDERED | Spliterator.IMMUTABLE), false);
}
Seems to work with all cases without duplication.
With regard to the specific question of generating a reverse IntStream:
starting from Java 9 you can use the three-argument version of the IntStream.iterate(...):
IntStream.iterate(10, x -> x >= 0, x -> x - 1).forEach(System.out::println);
// Out: 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
where:
IntStream.iterate(int seed, IntPredicate hasNext, IntUnaryOperator next);
seed - the initial element;
hasNext - a predicate to apply to elements to determine when the
stream must terminate;
next - a function to be applied to the previous element to produce a
new element.
Simplest way (simple collect - supports parallel streams):
public static <T> Stream<T> reverse(Stream<T> stream) {
return stream
.collect(Collector.of(
() -> new ArrayDeque<T>(),
ArrayDeque::addFirst,
(q1, q2) -> { q2.addAll(q1); return q2; })
)
.stream();
}
Advanced way (supports parallel streams in an ongoing way):
public static <T> Stream<T> reverse(Stream<T> stream) {
Objects.requireNonNull(stream, "stream");
class ReverseSpliterator implements Spliterator<T> {
private Spliterator<T> spliterator;
private final Deque<T> deque = new ArrayDeque<>();
private ReverseSpliterator(Spliterator<T> spliterator) {
this.spliterator = spliterator;
}
#Override
#SuppressWarnings({"StatementWithEmptyBody"})
public boolean tryAdvance(Consumer<? super T> action) {
while(spliterator.tryAdvance(deque::addFirst));
if(!deque.isEmpty()) {
action.accept(deque.remove());
return true;
}
return false;
}
#Override
public Spliterator<T> trySplit() {
// After traveling started the spliterator don't contain elements!
Spliterator<T> prev = spliterator.trySplit();
if(prev == null) {
return null;
}
Spliterator<T> me = spliterator;
spliterator = prev;
return new ReverseSpliterator(me);
}
#Override
public long estimateSize() {
return spliterator.estimateSize();
}
#Override
public int characteristics() {
return spliterator.characteristics();
}
#Override
public Comparator<? super T> getComparator() {
Comparator<? super T> comparator = spliterator.getComparator();
return (comparator != null) ? comparator.reversed() : null;
}
#Override
public void forEachRemaining(Consumer<? super T> action) {
// Ensure that tryAdvance is called at least once
if(!deque.isEmpty() || tryAdvance(action)) {
deque.forEach(action);
}
}
}
return StreamSupport.stream(new ReverseSpliterator(stream.spliterator()), stream.isParallel());
}
Note you can quickly extends to other type of streams (IntStream, ...).
Testing:
// Use parallel if you wish only
revert(Stream.of("One", "Two", "Three", "Four", "Five", "Six").parallel())
.forEachOrdered(System.out::println);
Results:
Six
Five
Four
Three
Two
One
Additional notes: The simplest way it isn't so useful when used with other stream operations (the collect join breaks the parallelism). The advance way doesn't have that issue, and it keeps also the initial characteristics of the stream, for example SORTED, and so, it's the way to go to use with other stream operations after the reverse.
ArrayDeque are faster in the stack than a Stack or LinkedList. "push()" inserts elements at the front of the Deque
protected <T> Stream<T> reverse(Stream<T> stream) {
ArrayDeque<T> stack = new ArrayDeque<>();
stream.forEach(stack::push);
return stack.stream();
}
List newStream = list.stream().sorted(Collections.reverseOrder()).collect(Collectors.toList());
newStream.forEach(System.out::println);
One could write a collector that collects elements in reversed order:
public static <T> Collector<T, ?, Stream<T>> reversed() {
return Collectors.collectingAndThen(Collectors.toList(), list -> {
Collections.reverse(list);
return list.stream();
});
}
And use it like this:
Stream.of(1, 2, 3, 4, 5).collect(reversed()).forEach(System.out::println);
Original answer (contains a bug - it does not work correctly for parallel streams):
A general purpose stream reverse method could look like:
public static <T> Stream<T> reverse(Stream<T> stream) {
LinkedList<T> stack = new LinkedList<>();
stream.forEach(stack::push);
return stack.stream();
}
For reference I was looking at the same problem, I wanted to join the string value of stream elements in the reverse order.
itemList = { last, middle, first } => first,middle,last
I started to use an intermediate collection with collectingAndThen from comonad or the ArrayDeque collector of Stuart Marks, although I wasn't happy with intermediate collection, and streaming again
itemList.stream()
.map(TheObject::toString)
.collect(Collectors.collectingAndThen(Collectors.toList(),
strings -> {
Collections.reverse(strings);
return strings;
}))
.stream()
.collect(Collector.joining());
So I iterated over Stuart Marks answer that was using the Collector.of factory, that has the interesting finisher lambda.
itemList.stream()
.collect(Collector.of(StringBuilder::new,
(sb, o) -> sb.insert(0, o),
(r1, r2) -> { r1.insert(0, r2); return r1; },
StringBuilder::toString));
Since in this case the stream is not parallel, the combiner is not relevant that much, I'm using insert anyway for the sake of code consistency but it does not matter as it would depend of which stringbuilder is built first.
I looked at the StringJoiner, however it does not have an insert method.
Not purely Java8 but if you use guava's Lists.reverse() method in conjunction, you can easily achieve this:
List<Integer> list = Arrays.asList(1,2,3,4);
Lists.reverse(list).stream().forEach(System.out::println);
Reversing string or any Array
(Stream.of("abcdefghijklm 1234567".split("")).collect(Collectors.collectingAndThen(Collectors.toList(),list -> {Collections.reverse(list);return list;}))).stream().forEach(System.out::println);
split can be modified based on the delimiter or space
How about reversing the Collection backing the stream prior?
import java.util.Collections;
import java.util.List;
public void reverseTest(List<Integer> sampleCollection) {
Collections.reverse(sampleCollection); // remember this reverses the elements in the list, so if you want the original input collection to remain untouched clone it first.
sampleCollection.stream().forEach(item -> {
// you op here
});
}
Answering specific question of reversing with IntStream, below worked for me:
IntStream.range(0, 10)
.map(x -> x * -1)
.sorted()
.map(Math::abs)
.forEach(System.out::println);
In all this I don't see the answer I would go to first.
This isn't exactly a direct answer to the question, but it's a potential solution to the problem.
Just build the list backwards in the first place. If you can, use a LinkedList instead of an ArrayList and when you add items use "Push" instead of add. The list will be built in the reverse order and will then stream correctly without any manipulation.
This won't fit cases where you are dealing with primitive arrays or lists that are already used in various ways but does work well in a surprising number of cases.
the simplest solution is using List::listIterator and Stream::generate
List<Integer> list = Arrays.asList(1, 2, 3, 4, 5);
ListIterator<Integer> listIterator = list.listIterator(list.size());
Stream.generate(listIterator::previous)
.limit(list.size())
.forEach(System.out::println);
This method works with any Stream and is Java 8 compliant:
Stream<Integer> myStream = Stream.of(1, 2, 3, 4, 5);
myStream.reduce(Stream.empty(),
(Stream<Integer> a, Integer b) -> Stream.concat(Stream.of(b), a),
(a, b) -> Stream.concat(b, a))
.forEach(System.out::println);
This is how I do it.
I don't like the idea of creating a new collection and reverse iterating it.
The IntStream#map idea is pretty neat, but I prefer the IntStream#iterate method, for I think the idea of a countdown to Zero better expressed with the iterate method and easier to understand in terms of walking the array from back to front.
import static java.lang.Math.max;
private static final double EXACT_MATCH = 0d;
public static IntStream reverseStream(final int[] array) {
return countdownFrom(array.length - 1).map(index -> array[index]);
}
public static DoubleStream reverseStream(final double[] array) {
return countdownFrom(array.length - 1).mapToDouble(index -> array[index]);
}
public static <T> Stream<T> reverseStream(final T[] array) {
return countdownFrom(array.length - 1).mapToObj(index -> array[index]);
}
public static IntStream countdownFrom(final int top) {
return IntStream.iterate(top, t -> t - 1).limit(max(0, (long) top + 1));
}
Here are some tests to prove it works:
import static java.lang.Integer.MAX_VALUE;
import static org.junit.Assert.*;
#Test
public void testReverseStream_emptyArrayCreatesEmptyStream() {
Assert.assertEquals(0, reverseStream(new double[0]).count());
}
#Test
public void testReverseStream_singleElementCreatesSingleElementStream() {
Assert.assertEquals(1, reverseStream(new double[1]).count());
final double[] singleElementArray = new double[] { 123.4 };
assertArrayEquals(singleElementArray, reverseStream(singleElementArray).toArray(), EXACT_MATCH);
}
#Test
public void testReverseStream_multipleElementsAreStreamedInReversedOrder() {
final double[] arr = new double[] { 1d, 2d, 3d };
final double[] revArr = new double[] { 3d, 2d, 1d };
Assert.assertEquals(arr.length, reverseStream(arr).count());
Assert.assertArrayEquals(revArr, reverseStream(arr).toArray(), EXACT_MATCH);
}
#Test
public void testCountdownFrom_returnsAllElementsFromTopToZeroInReverseOrder() {
assertArrayEquals(new int[] { 4, 3, 2, 1, 0 }, countdownFrom(4).toArray());
}
#Test
public void testCountdownFrom_countingDownStartingWithZeroOutputsTheNumberZero() {
assertArrayEquals(new int[] { 0 }, countdownFrom(0).toArray());
}
#Test
public void testCountdownFrom_doesNotChokeOnIntegerMaxValue() {
assertEquals(true, countdownFrom(MAX_VALUE).anyMatch(x -> x == MAX_VALUE));
}
#Test
public void testCountdownFrom_givesZeroLengthCountForNegativeValues() {
assertArrayEquals(new int[0], countdownFrom(-1).toArray());
assertArrayEquals(new int[0], countdownFrom(-4).toArray());
}
Based on #stuart-marks's answer, but without casting, function returning stream of list elements starting from end:
public static <T> Stream<T> reversedStream(List<T> tList) {
final int size = tList.size();
return IntStream.range(0, size)
.mapToObj(i -> tList.get(size - 1 - i));
}
// usage
reversedStream(list).forEach(System.out::println);
What's the proper generic way to reverse a stream?
If the stream does not specify an encounter order, don't.
(!s.spliterator().hasCharacteristics(java.util.Spliterator.ORDERED))
The most generic and the easiest way to reverse a list will be :
public static <T> void reverseHelper(List<T> li){
li.stream()
.sorted((x,y)-> -1)
.collect(Collectors.toList())
.forEach(System.out::println);
}
Java 8 way to do this:
List<Integer> list = Arrays.asList(1,2,3,4);
Comparator<Integer> comparator = Integer::compare;
list.stream().sorted(comparator.reversed()).forEach(System.out::println);