We Keep Coding

Java generics involving inheritance and this

I have a (for me) complex Java generics problem. I read through some documentation and understand some but certainly not all of what I should. Basically, for me, trying to solve it would result in try and error.
In the following, I give a condensed example of my code, once without any generics (so one can hopefully understand what I want to achieve) and the other with some additions that come closer to the solution. Please correct my second version and/or point me to specific documentation. (I have general documentation of Java generics. But my code seems to have several interfering challenges and it is hard to a correct solution)
About my example: There is an abstract base type and several implementing variants (only one is given). Method combine() calls getOp1(), which decides (depending on <some condition>) if it should operate on its own instance or on a new one. After the calculation, it returns the target instance.
abstract class Base {
protected final Base getOp1() {
if(Util.isConditionMet()) { return getNewInstance(); }
else { return this; }
}
protected abstract Base getNewInstance(); // returns a new instance of an implementing class
public abstract Base combine(Base other);
}
class Variant extends Base {
public Variant getNewInstance() { return new Variant(); }
public combine(Variant op2) {
Variant op1 = getOp1();
op1.calculate(op2);
return op1;
}
private void calculate(Variant other) { /* some code */ }
}
The version with some generics added. This version is faulty and does not compile.
abstract class Base<T extends Base<T>> {
protected final T getOp1() {
if(Util.isConditionMet()) { return getNewInstance(); }
else { return this; }
}
protected abstract T getNewInstance(); // returns a new instance of an implementing class
public abstract T combine(T other);
}
class Variant<T extends Variant<T>> extends Base<T> {
protected T getNewInstance() { return new Variant(); }
public T combine(T op2) {
T op1 = getOp1();
op1.calculate(op2);
return op1;
}
private void calculate(T other) { /* some code */ }
}

To make this code working, you need to resolve incompatibility type issues: replace T returning types by Base<T> and cast result of Variant#getOp1() to Variant<T> to allow invoke calculate() on it (this is safe here because Variant#getOp1() always returns Variant:
abstract class Base<T extends Base<T>> {
protected final Base<T> getOp1() {
return condition() ? getNewInstance() : this;
}
protected abstract Base<T> getNewInstance();
public abstract Base<T> combine(T other);
}
class Variant<T extends Variant<T>> extends Base<T> {
protected Base<T> getNewInstance() {
return new Variant();
}
public Base<T> combine(T op2) {
Variant<T> op1 = (Variant<T>) getOp1(); // <- explicit cast
op1.calculate(op2);
return op1;
}
private void calculate(Base<T> other) {
// ...
}
}
Btw, I still see no reason of such complicated type structure.

I have seen a couple of such combinational, operational classes, though never too elaborate. Maybe inheritance is not the right tool.
Better to use a lookup mechanism for capabilities, features.
class Base {
// Untyped
private Map<Class<?>, Object> capabilities = new HashMap<>();
protected <I> void register(Class<I> intf, I obj) {
capabilities.put(intf, obj);
}
public <T> Optional<T> lookup(Class<T> intf) {
Object obj = capabilities.get(intf);
return obj == null ? Optional.emtpy() : Optional.of(intf.cast(obj));
}
}
interface Flying {
void fly(double altitude);
}
Base pelican = new Pelican();
Flying flying = pelical.lookup(Flying.class).orElse(null);
flying.fly(0.5);
This also allows dynamic changes, and combining things with respect to two aspects.

How does one restrict number of allowed types in Java generic type

Say, i have a generic type as below
public class GenericType<T> {
private T someVar;
public void setVar(T var) { this.someVar = var; }
//Rest of the code
}
I want to allow it to take only specific types(String/Integer/Double). I know about bounded wildcards but they don't help me here. In setVar(), I can check the instanceof and throw an Exception if type is not Integer/String etc. Is this the best way to do it?
I have the same problem when doing operations on this type. Depending on the type, I want to do different operations. Inheritance and bounded wildcards seem like the way to go in general for this kind of problem but these are primitive wrappers.

Using Inheritance:
Parent.java
public abstract class Parent<T> {
public abstract void display(T t);
}
ChildString.java
public class ChildString extends Parent<String> {
#Override
public void display(String t) {
// Do something here...
}
}
ChildInteger.java
public class ChildInteger extends Parent<Integer> {
#Override
public void display(Integer t) {
// Do something here...
}
}
ChildDouble.java
public class ChildDouble extends Parent<Double> {
#Override
public void display(Double t) {
// Do something here...
}
}
And access the class child rather than you directly access the parent class.
Update
Here another example:
GenericType.java
public class GenericType {
public void display(Object t) {
String msg;
if(t instanceof String) {
msg = "String";
} else if (t instanceof Integer) {
msg = "Integer";
} else if (t instanceof Double) {
msg = "Double";
} else {
msg = "Another Object";
}
System.out.println(msg);
}
}
SpecificGeneric.java
public class SpecificGeneric {
public static void main(String[] args) {
GenericType basicType = new GenericType();
basicType.display(new String());
basicType.display(new Integer(1));
basicType.display(new Double(0.1));
}
}

You cannot (more than extends something, but in your case you want few unrelated types, so it does not help).
What you can, is check instance passed to method (you already know it). If you want one instace of generic class for eg. String another for Integers, but don't allow eg. Point2D, you can make constructor with parameter Class clazz and check when constructing whether its allowed.
If you are more paranoid, you can store that clazz and in all function compare whether parameter is actualy that class.
This way, you can still create MyClass, but cannot create instance with this type. (But you can cast it, co its not fool proof)

Inferring the desired type say GenericType<Double> and using instanceof when neccesary is the quickest and easy option. Alternatively overload setVar(..) to accept the restricted types in your Generic class.
public static class GenericType<T>
{
private T someVar;
public void setVar(String var)
{
this.someVar = (T) var;
}
public void setVar(Integer var)
{
this.someVar = (T) var;
}
public void setVar(Double var)
{
this.someVar = (T) var;
}
}

Java: instanceof Generic

Isn't there any way to find the class-type of a generic?
if (T instanceof String) {
// do something...
}
The above definitely does not compile.

Generics are a compile time feature. Generics add checks at compile time which may not have any meaning at runtime. This is one example. You can only check the type of the object referenced which could be a super type in code. If you want to pass the type T you have do this explicitly.
void someMethod(Class<T> tClass) {
if(String.class.isAssignableFrom(tClass))
or
void someMethod(Class<T> tClass, T tArg) {
Note: the type might not be the same,
someMethod(Number.class, 1);

It won't compile because T is not a variable, but a place holder for a class that is defined at runtime. Here's a quick sample:
public class Test<T> {
public void something(T arg) {
if (arg instanceof String) {
System.out.println("Woot!");
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Test<String> t = new Test<String>();
t.something("Hello");
}
}

if you have subclass
public class SomeClass extends SomeSubclass<String>{}
and
public class SomeSubclass<T> {}
then there is a way to discover type of T by executing code
Type t = getClass().getGenericSuperclass()
if (t instanceof ParameterizedType) {
Type[] actualTypeArguments = ((ParameterizedType)t).getActualTypeArguments()
// in simple cases actualTypeArguments will contain Classes, since Class implements Type
}
if your case are a bit more complex (? extends String)` take a look at org.ormunit.entity.AEntityAccessor#extractClass

If you have specific field you can just check it like below:
private <T> String someMethod(T genericElement)
{
if (String.class.isInstance(genericElement))
{
return (String) genericElement;
}
...

Java generics (template) specialization possible (overriding template types with specific types)

I'm wondering what are the options to specialize generic types in Java, i.e. in a templated class to have specific overrides for certain types.
In my case I was a generic class (of type T) to return null usually, but return "" (the empty string), when T is the String type, or 0 (zero) when its the Integer type, etc.
Merely providing a type-specific overload of a method produces a "method is ambiguous" error:
e.g.:
public class Hacking {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Bar<Integer> barInt = new Bar<Integer>();
Bar<String> barString = new Bar<String>();
// OK, returns null
System.out.println(barInt.get(new Integer(4)));
// ERROR: The method get(String) is ambiguous for the type Bar<String>
System.out.println(barString.get(new String("foo")));
}
public static class Bar<T> {
public T get(T x) {
return null;
}
public String get(String x) {
return "";
}
}
}
Is the only option to subclass the generic class with a specific type (see StringBar in the following example?
public static void main(String[] args) {
Bar<Integer> barInt = new Bar<Integer>();
StringBar barString2 = new StringBar();
// OK, returns null
System.out.println(barInt.get());
// OK, returns ""
System.out.println(barString2.get());
}
public static class Bar<T> {
public T get() {
return null;
}
}
public static class StringBar extends Bar<String> {
public String get() {
return "";
}
}
}
Is this is the only way, it's a bit of a pain to have to create a subclass for every type I want to specialize instead of an overload of get() in the Bar class.
I'm guessing I could check the instanceof in the Bar.get() method, e.g.
T get(T t) {
if (t instanceof String) return "";
if (t instanceof Integer) return 0;
else return null;
}
However I've been taught to avoid instanceof and use polymorphism when possible.

All things considered, the concensus appears to be that the StringBar method mentioned in the question is the only way to go.
public static class StringBar extends Bar<String> {
public String get() {
return "";
}
}

Generics in Java are very different from templates in C++ in this respect. It is not possible to write a specific version of a generic class to do something different for a particular case, as C++ can do. It is also not possible to determine at run time what T is - this is because that information is not passed into the byte code (object code) and so doesn't even exist at runtime. This due to something called "type erasure".
BarString and BarInt would be the obvious way of doing this, but there are improvements you can make. For example you can write a generic Bar to cover the common cases, and then write specialized BarString and BarInt to implement special cases. Ensure that the instances can only be created through a factory, which takes the class of the object to be processed:
class Bar<T> {
class BarString extends Bar<String> {
// specialist code goes here
}
static Bar<T> createBar(Class<T> clazz) {
if (clazz==String.class) {
return new BarString();
} else {
return new Bar<T>;
}
That probably won't compile, but I don't have the time to work out the exact syntax. It does illustrate the principle.

The compiler is actually correct, because the following code is compile-time checked (Bar<String> barString = new Bar<String>();) when compiled, from
public static class Bar<T> {
public T get(T x) {
return null;
}
public String get(String x) {
return "";
}
}
to
public static class Bar<String> {
public String get(String x) {
return null;
}
public String get(String x) {
return "";
}
}
and is ambiguous as you can't have 2 identical methods with the same return types and the same parameter arguments.
See an explanation by Jon Skeet's:
What is the concept of erasure of generics in java?
Java Generics - Types erasures - when and what happens?
You can subclass Bar<T> and create StringBar (note I removed the static keyword) and override get() method.
public class BarString extends Bar<String> {
#Override
public String get(String x) {
return "";
}
}

Generics in Java aren't made for specialization. They're made for generalization! If you want to specialize for certain types, you should be specializing...through a subclass.
Often you don't need to do something in a specialized manner however. Your StringBar example is kind of contrived because you could have this:
public class Bar<T> {
private final T value;
public T get() {
return value;
}
}
I don't see why you need to specialize for a String here.

Java: Instanceof and Generics

Before I look through my generic data structure for a value's index, I'd like to see if it is even an instance of the type this has been parametrized to.
But Eclipse complains when I do this:
#Override
public int indexOf(Object arg0) {
if (!(arg0 instanceof E)) {
return -1;
}
This is the error message:
Cannot perform instanceof check against type parameter E. Use instead its erasure Object since generic type information will be erased at runtime
What is the better way to do it?

The error message says it all. At runtime, the type is gone, there is no way to check for it.
You could catch it by making a factory for your object like this:
public static <T> MyObject<T> createMyObject(Class<T> type) {
return new MyObject<T>(type);
}
And then in the object's constructor store that type, so variable so that your method could look like this:
if (arg0 != null && !(this.type.isAssignableFrom(arg0.getClass())) {
return -1;
}

Two options for runtime type checking with generics:
Option 1 - Corrupt your constructor
Let's assume you are overriding indexOf(...), and you want to check the type just for performance, to save yourself iterating the entire collection.
Make a filthy constructor like this:
public MyCollection<T>(Class<T> t) {
this.t = t;
}
Then you can use isAssignableFrom to check the type.
public int indexOf(Object o) {
if (
o != null &&
!t.isAssignableFrom(o.getClass())
) return -1;
//...
Each time you instantiate your object you would have to repeat yourself:
new MyCollection<Apples>(Apples.class);
You might decide it isn't worth it. In the implementation of ArrayList.indexOf(...), they do not check that the type matches.
Option 2 - Let it fail
If you need to use an abstract method that requires your unknown type, then all you really want is for the compiler to stop crying about instanceof. If you have a method like this:
protected abstract void abstractMethod(T element);
You can use it like this:
public int indexOf(Object o) {
try {
abstractMethod((T) o);
} catch (ClassCastException e) {
//...
You are casting the object to T (your generic type), just to fool the compiler. Your cast does nothing at runtime, but you will still get a ClassCastException when you try to pass the wrong type of object into your abstract method.
NOTE 1: If you are doing additional unchecked casts in your abstract method, your ClassCastExceptions will get caught here. That could be good or bad, so think it through.
NOTE 2: You get a free null check when you use instanceof. Since you can't use it, you may need to check for null with your bare hands.

Old post, but a simple way to do generic instanceOf checking.
public static <T> boolean isInstanceOf(Class<T> clazz, Class<T> targetClass) {
return clazz.isInstance(targetClass);
}

Provided your class extends a class with a generic parameter, you can also get this at runtime via reflection, and then use that for comparison, i.e.
class YourClass extends SomeOtherClass<String>
{
private Class<?> clazz;
public Class<?> getParameterizedClass()
{
if(clazz == null)
{
ParameterizedType pt = (ParameterizedType)this.getClass().getGenericSuperclass();
clazz = (Class<?>)pt.getActualTypeArguments()[0];
}
return clazz;
}
}
In the case above, at runtime you will get String.class from getParameterizedClass(), and it caches so you don't get any reflection overhead upon multiple checks. Note that you can get the other parameterized types by index from the ParameterizedType.getActualTypeArguments() method.

I had the same problem and here is my solution (very humble, #george: this time compiling AND working ...).
My probem was inside an abstract class that implements Observer.
The Observable fires method update(...) with Object class that can be any kind of Object.
I only want to handler Objects of type T
The solution is to pass the class to the constructor in order to be able to compare types at runtime.
public abstract class AbstractOne<T> implements Observer {
private Class<T> tClass;
public AbstractOne(Class<T> clazz) {
tClass = clazz;
}
#Override
public void update(Observable o, Object arg) {
if (tClass.isInstance(arg)) {
// Here I am, arg has the type T
foo((T) arg);
}
}
public abstract foo(T t);
}
For the implementation we just have to pass the Class to the constructor
public class OneImpl extends AbstractOne<Rule> {
public OneImpl() {
super(Rule.class);
}
#Override
public void foo(Rule t){
}
}

Or you could catch a failed attempt to cast into E eg.
public int indexOf(Object arg0){
try{
E test=(E)arg0;
return doStuff(test);
}catch(ClassCastException e){
return -1;
}
}

Technically you shouldn't have to, that's the point of generics, so you can do compile-type checking:
public int indexOf(E arg0) {
...
}
but then the #Override may be a problem if you have a class hierarchy. Otherwise see Yishai's answer.

The runtime type of the object is a relatively arbitrary condition to filter on. I suggest keeping such muckiness away from your collection. This is simply achieved by having your collection delegate to a filter passed in a construction.
public interface FilterObject {
boolean isAllowed(Object obj);
}
public class FilterOptimizedList<E> implements List<E> {
private final FilterObject filter;
...
public FilterOptimizedList(FilterObject filter) {
if (filter == null) {
throw NullPointerException();
}
this.filter = filter;
}
...
public int indexOf(Object obj) {
if (!filter.isAllows(obj)) {
return -1;
}
...
}
...
}
final List<String> longStrs = new FilterOptimizedList<String>(
new FilterObject() { public boolean isAllowed(Object obj) {
if (obj == null) {
return true;
} else if (obj instanceof String) {
String str = (String)str;
return str.length() > = 4;
} else {
return false;
}
}}
);

Let Java determine it and catch the exception bottom line.
public class Behaviour<T> {
public void behave(Object object) {
T typedObject = null;
try { typedObject = (T) object; }
catch (ClassCastException ignored) {}
if (null != typedObject) {
// Do something type-safe with typedObject
}
}
}