Good way to convert Optional<Integer> to Optional<Long> - java

I am trying to find a clean and code-efficient way to convert Optional<Integer> to Optional<Long>. I am working in Java 7 with Guava.
So in one place in the code I have an optional integer created
Optional<Integer> optionalInt = Optional.fromNullable(someInt);
And in another area I need it as an optional long.
The nicest thing I could come up with is this:
Optional<Long> optionalLong = optionalInt.transform(new Function<Integer, Long>() {
#Override
public Long apply(Integer inputInt) {
if (inputInt != null)
return inputInt.longValue();
else
return null;
}
});
But this is cumbersome, especially if you consider how easy it was to cast the type when I was using primitive types.
Any good ideas out there?

TL;DR: In Java 7, No.
Sadly this is the best Java 7 has to offer in terms of support for functions.
I would just say that transform will never be called with null so you can do:
Optional<Long> optionalLong = optionalInt.transform(new Function<Integer, Long>() {
#Override
public Long apply(Integer inputInt) {
return inputInt.longValue();
}
});
From the documentation:
If the instance is present, it is transformed with the given
Function; otherwise, absent() is returned. If the function returns
null, a NullPointerException is thrown.
So never return null from a Function passed to transform.
If you reuse this a lot, then you could use the enum singleton pattern:
public enum IntToLong implements Function<Integer, Long> {
INSTANCE;
#Override
public Long apply(Integer input) {
return input.longValue();
}
}
Then:
optionalInt.transform(IntToLong.INSTANCE);
This obviously reduces the code at the call site at the expense of having extra classes in the code base - something I wouldn't be too worried about.

close to the cast:
Optional<Long> optionalLong = Optional.fromNullable(optionalInt.isPresent() ?
optionalInt.get().longValue() : null);
basically this avoids the overhead of invoking transform. Invoking isPresent could be simplified to checking the value for null directly.

Related

Checking for duplicated data in Java array list [duplicate]

I want to check whether a List contains an object that has a field with a certain value. Now, I could use a loop to go through and check, but I was curious if there was anything more code efficient.
Something like;
if(list.contains(new Object().setName("John"))){
//Do some stuff
}
I know the above code doesn't do anything, it's just to demonstrate roughly what I am trying to achieve.
Also, just to clarify, the reason I don't want to use a simple loop is because this code will currently go inside a loop that is inside a loop which is inside a loop. For readability I don't want to keep adding loops to these loops. So I wondered if there were any simple(ish) alternatives.
Streams
If you are using Java 8, perhaps you could try something like this:
public boolean containsName(final List<MyObject> list, final String name){
return list.stream().filter(o -> o.getName().equals(name)).findFirst().isPresent();
}
Or alternatively, you could try something like this:
public boolean containsName(final List<MyObject> list, final String name){
return list.stream().map(MyObject::getName).filter(name::equals).findFirst().isPresent();
}
This method will return true if the List<MyObject> contains a MyObject with the name name. If you want to perform an operation on each of the MyObjects that getName().equals(name), then you could try something like this:
public void perform(final List<MyObject> list, final String name){
list.stream().filter(o -> o.getName().equals(name)).forEach(
o -> {
//...
}
);
}
Where o represents a MyObject instance.
Alternatively, as the comments suggest (Thanks MK10), you could use the Stream#anyMatch method:
public boolean containsName(final List<MyObject> list, final String name){
return list.stream().anyMatch(o -> name.equals(o.getName()));
}
You have two choices.
1. The first choice, which is preferable, is to override the `equals()` method in your Object class.
Let's say, for example, you have this Object class:
public class MyObject {
private String name;
private String location;
//getters and setters
}
Now let's say you only care about the MyObject's name, that it should be unique so if two `MyObject`s have the same name they should be considered equal. In that case, you would want to override the `equals()` method (and also the `hashcode()` method) so that it compares the names to determine equality.
Once you've done this, you can check to see if a Collection contains a MyObject with the name "foo" by like so:
MyObject object = new MyObject();
object.setName("foo");
collection.contains(object);
However, this might not be an option for you if:
You are using both the name and location to check for equality, but you only want to check if a Collection has any `MyObject`s with a certain location. In this case, you've already overridden `equals()`.
`MyObject` is part of an API that you don't have liberty to change.
If either of these are the case, you'll want option 2:
2. Write your own utility method:
public static boolean containsLocation(Collection<MyObject> c, String location) {
for(MyObject o : c) {
if(o != null && o.getLocation.equals(location)) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
Alternatively, you could extend ArrayList (or some other collection) and then add your own method to it:
public boolean containsLocation(String location) {
for(MyObject o : this) {
if(o != null && o.getLocation.equals(location)) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
Unfortunately there's not a better way around it.
This is how to do it using Java 8+ :
boolean isJohnAlive = list.stream().anyMatch(o -> "John".equals(o.getName());
Google Guava
If you're using Guava, you can take a functional approach and do the following
FluentIterable.from(list).find(new Predicate<MyObject>() {
public boolean apply(MyObject input) {
return "John".equals(input.getName());
}
}).Any();
which looks a little verbose. However the predicate is an object and you can provide different variants for different searches. Note how the library itself separates the iteration of the collection and the function you wish to apply. You don't have to override equals() for a particular behaviour.
As noted below, the java.util.Stream framework built into Java 8 and later provides something similar.
Collection.contains() is implemented by calling equals() on each object until one returns true.
So one way to implement this is to override equals() but of course, you can only have one equals.
Frameworks like Guava therefore use predicates for this. With Iterables.find(list, predicate), you can search for arbitrary fields by putting the test into the predicate.
Other languages built on top of the VM have this built in. In Groovy, for example, you simply write:
def result = list.find{ it.name == 'John' }
Java 8 made all our lives easier, too:
List<Foo> result = list.stream()
.filter(it -> "John".equals(it.getName())
.collect(Collectors.toList());
If you care about things like this, I suggest the book "Beyond Java". It contains many examples for the numerous shortcomings of Java and how other languages do better.
Binary Search
You can use Collections.binarySearch to search an element in your list (assuming the list is sorted):
Collections.binarySearch(list, new YourObject("a1", "b",
"c"), new Comparator<YourObject>() {
#Override
public int compare(YourObject o1, YourObject o2) {
return o1.getName().compareTo(o2.getName());
}
});
which will return a negative number if the object is not present in the collection or else it will return the index of the object. With this you can search for objects with different searching strategies.
Map
You could create a Hashmap<String, Object> using one of the values as a key, and then seeing if yourHashMap.keySet().contains(yourValue) returns true.
Eclipse Collections
If you're using Eclipse Collections, you can use the anySatisfy() method. Either adapt your List in a ListAdapter or change your List into a ListIterable if possible.
ListIterable<MyObject> list = ...;
boolean result =
list.anySatisfy(myObject -> myObject.getName().equals("John"));
If you'll do operations like this frequently, it's better to extract a method which answers whether the type has the attribute.
public class MyObject
{
private final String name;
public MyObject(String name)
{
this.name = name;
}
public boolean named(String name)
{
return Objects.equals(this.name, name);
}
}
You can use the alternate form anySatisfyWith() together with a method reference.
boolean result = list.anySatisfyWith(MyObject::named, "John");
If you cannot change your List into a ListIterable, here's how you'd use ListAdapter.
boolean result =
ListAdapter.adapt(list).anySatisfyWith(MyObject::named, "John");
Note: I am a committer for Eclipse ollections.
Predicate
If you dont use Java 8, or library which gives you more functionality for dealing with collections, you could implement something which can be more reusable than your solution.
interface Predicate<T>{
boolean contains(T item);
}
static class CollectionUtil{
public static <T> T find(final Collection<T> collection,final Predicate<T> predicate){
for (T item : collection){
if (predicate.contains(item)){
return item;
}
}
return null;
}
// and many more methods to deal with collection
}
i'm using something like that, i have predicate interface, and i'm passing it implementation to my util class.
What is advantage of doing this in my way? you have one method which deals with searching in any type collection. and you dont have to create separate methods if you want to search by different field. alll what you need to do is provide different predicate which can be destroyed as soon as it no longer usefull/
if you want to use it, all what you need to do is call method and define tyour predicate
CollectionUtil.find(list, new Predicate<MyObject>{
public boolean contains(T item){
return "John".equals(item.getName());
}
});
Here is a solution using Guava
private boolean checkUserListContainName(List<User> userList, final String targetName){
return FluentIterable.from(userList).anyMatch(new Predicate<User>() {
#Override
public boolean apply(#Nullable User input) {
return input.getName().equals(targetName);
}
});
}
contains method uses equals internally. So you need to override the equals method for your class as per your need.
Btw this does not look syntatically correct:
new Object().setName("John")
If you need to perform this List.contains(Object with field value equal to x) repeatedly, a simple and efficient workaround would be:
List<field obj type> fieldOfInterestValues = new ArrayList<field obj type>;
for(Object obj : List) {
fieldOfInterestValues.add(obj.getFieldOfInterest());
}
Then the List.contains(Object with field value equal to x) would be have the same result as fieldOfInterestValues.contains(x);
Despite JAVA 8 SDK there is a lot of collection tools libraries can help you to work with, for instance:
http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-collections/
Predicate condition = new Predicate() {
boolean evaluate(Object obj) {
return ((Sample)obj).myField.equals("myVal");
}
};
List result = CollectionUtils.select( list, condition );

Difference between the signatures of Optional.map & Optional.flatMap methods [duplicate]

What's the difference between these two methods: Optional.flatMap() and Optional.map()?
An example would be appreciated.
Use map if the function returns the object you need or flatMap if the function returns an Optional. For example:
public static void main(String[] args) {
Optional<String> s = Optional.of("input");
System.out.println(s.map(Test::getOutput));
System.out.println(s.flatMap(Test::getOutputOpt));
}
static String getOutput(String input) {
return input == null ? null : "output for " + input;
}
static Optional<String> getOutputOpt(String input) {
return input == null ? Optional.empty() : Optional.of("output for " + input);
}
Both print statements print the same thing.
They both take a function from the type of the optional to something.
map() applies the function "as is" on the optional you have:
if (optional.isEmpty()) return Optional.empty();
else return Optional.of(f(optional.get()));
What happens if your function is a function from T -> Optional<U>?
Your result is now an Optional<Optional<U>>!
That's what flatMap() is about: if your function already returns an Optional, flatMap() is a bit smarter and doesn't double wrap it, returning Optional<U>.
It's the composition of two functional idioms: map and flatten.
Okay. You only need to use 'flatMap' when you're facing nested Optionals. Here's the example.
public class Person {
private Optional<Car> optionalCar;
public Optional<Car> getOptionalCar() {
return optionalCar;
}
}
public class Car {
private Optional<Insurance> optionalInsurance;
public Optional<Insurance> getOptionalInsurance() {
return optionalInsurance;
}
}
public class Insurance {
private String name;
public String getName() {
return name;
}
}
public class Test {
// map cannot deal with nested Optionals
public Optional<String> getCarInsuranceName(Person person) {
return person.getOptionalCar()
.map(Car::getOptionalInsurance) // ① leads to a Optional<Optional<Insurance>
.map(Insurance::getName); // ②
}
}
Like Stream, Optional#map will return a value wrapped by a Optional. That's why we get a nested Optional -- Optional<Optional<Insurance>. And at ②, we want to map it as an Insurance instance, that's how the tragedy happened.
The root is nested Optionals. If we can get the core value regardless the shells, we'll get it done. That's what flatMap does.
public Optional<String> getCarInsuranceName(Person person) {
return person.getOptionalCar()
.flatMap(Car::getOptionalInsurance)
.map(Insurance::getName);
}
In the end, I stronly recommed the Java 8 In Action to you if you'd like to study Java8 Systematicly.
Note:- below is the illustration of map and flatmap function, otherwise Optional is primarily designed to be used as a return type only.
As you already may know Optional is a kind of container which may or may not contain a single object, so it can be used wherever you anticipate a null value(You may never see NPE if use Optional properly). For example if you have a method which expects a person object which may be nullable you may want to write the method something like this:
void doSome(Optional<Person> person){
/*and here you want to retrieve some property phone out of person
you may write something like this:
*/
Optional<String> phone = person.map((p)->p.getPhone());
phone.ifPresent((ph)->dial(ph));
}
class Person{
private String phone;
//setter, getters
}
Here you have returned a String type which is automatically wrapped in an Optional type.
If person class looked like this, i.e. phone is also Optional
class Person{
private Optional<String> phone;
//setter,getter
}
In this case invoking map function will wrap the returned value in Optional and yield something like:
Optional<Optional<String>>
//And you may want Optional<String> instead, here comes flatMap
void doSome(Optional<Person> person){
Optional<String> phone = person.flatMap((p)->p.getPhone());
phone.ifPresent((ph)->dial(ph));
}
PS;
Never call get method (if you need to) on an Optional without checking it with isPresent() unless you can't live without NullPointerExceptions.
What helped me was a look at the source code of the two functions.
Map - wraps the result in an Optional.
public<U> Optional<U> map(Function<? super T, ? extends U> mapper) {
Objects.requireNonNull(mapper);
if (!isPresent())
return empty();
else {
return Optional.ofNullable(mapper.apply(value)); //<--- wraps in an optional
}
}
flatMap - returns the 'raw' object
public<U> Optional<U> flatMap(Function<? super T, Optional<U>> mapper) {
Objects.requireNonNull(mapper);
if (!isPresent())
return empty();
else {
return Objects.requireNonNull(mapper.apply(value)); //<--- returns 'raw' object
}
}
Optional.map():
Takes every element and if the value exists, it is passed to the function:
Optional<T> optionalValue = ...;
Optional<Boolean> added = optionalValue.map(results::add);
Now added has one of three values: true or false wrapped into an Optional , if optionalValue was present, or an empty Optional otherwise.
If you don't need to process the result you can simply use ifPresent(), it doesn't have return value:
optionalValue.ifPresent(results::add);
Optional.flatMap():
Works similar to the same method of streams. Flattens out the stream of streams. With the difference that if the value is presented it is applied to function. Otherwise, an empty optional is returned.
You can use it for composing optional value functions calls.
Suppose we have methods:
public static Optional<Double> inverse(Double x) {
return x == 0 ? Optional.empty() : Optional.of(1 / x);
}
public static Optional<Double> squareRoot(Double x) {
return x < 0 ? Optional.empty() : Optional.of(Math.sqrt(x));
}
Then you can compute the square root of the inverse, like:
Optional<Double> result = inverse(-4.0).flatMap(MyMath::squareRoot);
or, if you prefer:
Optional<Double> result = Optional.of(-4.0)
.flatMap(MyMath::inverse)
.flatMap(MyMath::squareRoot);
If either the inverse() or the squareRoot() returns Optional.empty(), the result is empty.
You can refer below link to understand in detail (best explanation which I could find):
https://www.programmergirl.com/java-8-map-flatmap-difference/
Both map and flatMap - accept Function. The return type of map() is a single value whereas flatMap is returning stream of values
<R> Stream<R> map(Function<? super T, ? extends R> mapper)
<R> Stream<R> flatMap(Function<? super T, ? extends Stream<? extends R>> mapper)
They do the same thing.
The only difference is that, the lambda return's type is wrapped by Optional or not.
For normal usage, map is shorter than flatMap
Example:
package bj;
import java.util.Optional;
import static java.lang.System.out;
public class App {
public static void main(String[] args) {
out.println(Optional.of(10).map (x -> x * x));
out.println(Optional.of(10).flatMap(x -> Optional.of(x * x)));
out.println(Optional.of(10).map (x -> Optional.of(x * x).get()));
out.println(Optional.<Integer>empty().map (x -> x * x));
out.println(Optional.<Integer>empty().flatMap(x -> Optional.of(x * x)));
out.println(Optional.<Integer>empty().map (x -> Optional.of(x * x).get()));
}
}
Output:
Optional[100]
Optional[100]
Optional[100]
Optional.empty
Optional.empty
Optional.empty

Tranforming Guava Optional with function that might return null

TL;DR
What is the best (i.e. most compact/readable) way of transforming a Guava Optional, using a function that might return null? (So that in that case, we should get an Optional.absent(), instead of an NPE.)
Bonus question: is there an advantage, in the Guava way, namely to throw NPE, if the transformer function returns null? (Instead of converting it to Optional.absent(), like in case of Java 8 Optionals.) Or is it just a shortcoming of the design?
Problem
As per the documentation of Guava Optional.transform:
Comparison to java.util.Optional: this method is similar to Java 8's
Optional.map, except when function returns null. In this case this
method throws an exception, whereas the Java 8 method returns
Optional.absent().
Example
The following function is common to both examples:
public String methodThatMighReturnNull(boolean returnNull, Integer input) {
return returnNull ? null : String.valueOf(input);
}
With Java 8 this does not throw an NPE, but returns an empty Optional:
Optional<Integer> input = Optional.of(42);
Optional<String> result = input.map(new Function<Integer, String>() {
public String apply(Integer input) {
return methodThatMighReturnNull(true, input);
}
});
The following, similar code with Guava throws an NPE:
Optional<Integer> input = Optional.of(42);
Optional<String> result = input.transform(new Function<Integer, String>() {
public String apply(Integer input) {
return methodThatMighReturnNull(true, input);
}
});
Possible alternatives
I have found/considered some alternatives, but, as described below, all are problematic:
Wrap the return value into an Optional. Problem: too cumbersome, more difficult to read;
Optional<Integer> input = Optional.of(42);
Optional<String> result = input.transform(new Function<Integer, Optional<String>>() {
public Optional<String> apply(Integer input) {
return fromNullable(methodThatMighReturnNull(true, input));
}
}).get();
Use if/else, by checking ifPresent. Problem: kind of kills the point of Optional. (We could just use the reference and check against null instead.)
Optional<Integer> input = Optional.of(42);
Optional<String> result;
if (input.isPresent()) {
result = fromNullable(methodThatMighReturnNull(true, input.get()));
} else {
result = Optional.absent();
}
Just applying the function, and wrapping it in fromNullable. (As found on GitHub, where the same problem was seemingly already brought up.) Problem: this is slightly different, than the original example. In this case, methodThatMighReturnNull could end up receiving null, while in the original case this was impossible.
Optional<Integer> input = Optional.of(42);
Optional<String> result;
result = fromNullable(new Function<Integer, String>() {
public String apply(Integer input) {
return methodThatMighReturnNull(true, input);
}
}.apply(input.orNull()));
Apart from the alternatives you listed in your question, here are two other possibilities:
If you are on Java 8 or higher, starting from Guava 21.0, you have the Optional.toJavaUtil() instance method, which transforms your Guava Optional instance into a java.util.Optional one, and also the Optional.fromJavaUtil static method, which creates a Guava Optional instance from a java.util.Optional one.
You can use them to let java.util.Optional take a function that invokes your method in its Optional.map method, applying its own semantics (it won't throw NullPointerException if the function returns null, but an empty java.util.Optional instead). Then, if you need it, convert this mapped java.util.Optional back to a Guava Optional via the Optional.fromJavaUtil method.
Here's the code that shows this approach:
Optional<Integer> input = Optional.of(42);
java.util.Optional<String> temp = input.toJavaUtil()
.map(i -> methodThatMighReturnNull(true, i));
Optional<String> result = Optional.fromJavaUtil(temp);
If you are not in Java 8 or higher yet (or if you are but don't like the previous approach), I would go for a variant of your 2nd alternative. For this, I would implement a transformNullSafe method with the semantics you need:
public static <T, R> Optional<R> transformNullSafe(
Optional<T> optional,
Function<T, R> function) {
if (optional.isPresent()) {
return Optional.fromNullable(function.apply(optional.get()));
} else {
return Optional.absent();
}
}
Usage:
Optional<Integer> input = Optional.of(42);
Optional<String> result = transformNullSafe(
input,
new Function<Integer, String>() {
public String apply(Integer i) {
return methodThatMighReturnNull(true, i);
}
});

What is the difference between Optional.flatMap and Optional.map?

What's the difference between these two methods: Optional.flatMap() and Optional.map()?
An example would be appreciated.
Use map if the function returns the object you need or flatMap if the function returns an Optional. For example:
public static void main(String[] args) {
Optional<String> s = Optional.of("input");
System.out.println(s.map(Test::getOutput));
System.out.println(s.flatMap(Test::getOutputOpt));
}
static String getOutput(String input) {
return input == null ? null : "output for " + input;
}
static Optional<String> getOutputOpt(String input) {
return input == null ? Optional.empty() : Optional.of("output for " + input);
}
Both print statements print the same thing.
They both take a function from the type of the optional to something.
map() applies the function "as is" on the optional you have:
if (optional.isEmpty()) return Optional.empty();
else return Optional.of(f(optional.get()));
What happens if your function is a function from T -> Optional<U>?
Your result is now an Optional<Optional<U>>!
That's what flatMap() is about: if your function already returns an Optional, flatMap() is a bit smarter and doesn't double wrap it, returning Optional<U>.
It's the composition of two functional idioms: map and flatten.
Okay. You only need to use 'flatMap' when you're facing nested Optionals. Here's the example.
public class Person {
private Optional<Car> optionalCar;
public Optional<Car> getOptionalCar() {
return optionalCar;
}
}
public class Car {
private Optional<Insurance> optionalInsurance;
public Optional<Insurance> getOptionalInsurance() {
return optionalInsurance;
}
}
public class Insurance {
private String name;
public String getName() {
return name;
}
}
public class Test {
// map cannot deal with nested Optionals
public Optional<String> getCarInsuranceName(Person person) {
return person.getOptionalCar()
.map(Car::getOptionalInsurance) // ① leads to a Optional<Optional<Insurance>
.map(Insurance::getName); // ②
}
}
Like Stream, Optional#map will return a value wrapped by a Optional. That's why we get a nested Optional -- Optional<Optional<Insurance>. And at ②, we want to map it as an Insurance instance, that's how the tragedy happened.
The root is nested Optionals. If we can get the core value regardless the shells, we'll get it done. That's what flatMap does.
public Optional<String> getCarInsuranceName(Person person) {
return person.getOptionalCar()
.flatMap(Car::getOptionalInsurance)
.map(Insurance::getName);
}
In the end, I stronly recommed the Java 8 In Action to you if you'd like to study Java8 Systematicly.
Note:- below is the illustration of map and flatmap function, otherwise Optional is primarily designed to be used as a return type only.
As you already may know Optional is a kind of container which may or may not contain a single object, so it can be used wherever you anticipate a null value(You may never see NPE if use Optional properly). For example if you have a method which expects a person object which may be nullable you may want to write the method something like this:
void doSome(Optional<Person> person){
/*and here you want to retrieve some property phone out of person
you may write something like this:
*/
Optional<String> phone = person.map((p)->p.getPhone());
phone.ifPresent((ph)->dial(ph));
}
class Person{
private String phone;
//setter, getters
}
Here you have returned a String type which is automatically wrapped in an Optional type.
If person class looked like this, i.e. phone is also Optional
class Person{
private Optional<String> phone;
//setter,getter
}
In this case invoking map function will wrap the returned value in Optional and yield something like:
Optional<Optional<String>>
//And you may want Optional<String> instead, here comes flatMap
void doSome(Optional<Person> person){
Optional<String> phone = person.flatMap((p)->p.getPhone());
phone.ifPresent((ph)->dial(ph));
}
PS;
Never call get method (if you need to) on an Optional without checking it with isPresent() unless you can't live without NullPointerExceptions.
What helped me was a look at the source code of the two functions.
Map - wraps the result in an Optional.
public<U> Optional<U> map(Function<? super T, ? extends U> mapper) {
Objects.requireNonNull(mapper);
if (!isPresent())
return empty();
else {
return Optional.ofNullable(mapper.apply(value)); //<--- wraps in an optional
}
}
flatMap - returns the 'raw' object
public<U> Optional<U> flatMap(Function<? super T, Optional<U>> mapper) {
Objects.requireNonNull(mapper);
if (!isPresent())
return empty();
else {
return Objects.requireNonNull(mapper.apply(value)); //<--- returns 'raw' object
}
}
Optional.map():
Takes every element and if the value exists, it is passed to the function:
Optional<T> optionalValue = ...;
Optional<Boolean> added = optionalValue.map(results::add);
Now added has one of three values: true or false wrapped into an Optional , if optionalValue was present, or an empty Optional otherwise.
If you don't need to process the result you can simply use ifPresent(), it doesn't have return value:
optionalValue.ifPresent(results::add);
Optional.flatMap():
Works similar to the same method of streams. Flattens out the stream of streams. With the difference that if the value is presented it is applied to function. Otherwise, an empty optional is returned.
You can use it for composing optional value functions calls.
Suppose we have methods:
public static Optional<Double> inverse(Double x) {
return x == 0 ? Optional.empty() : Optional.of(1 / x);
}
public static Optional<Double> squareRoot(Double x) {
return x < 0 ? Optional.empty() : Optional.of(Math.sqrt(x));
}
Then you can compute the square root of the inverse, like:
Optional<Double> result = inverse(-4.0).flatMap(MyMath::squareRoot);
or, if you prefer:
Optional<Double> result = Optional.of(-4.0)
.flatMap(MyMath::inverse)
.flatMap(MyMath::squareRoot);
If either the inverse() or the squareRoot() returns Optional.empty(), the result is empty.
You can refer below link to understand in detail (best explanation which I could find):
https://www.programmergirl.com/java-8-map-flatmap-difference/
Both map and flatMap - accept Function. The return type of map() is a single value whereas flatMap is returning stream of values
<R> Stream<R> map(Function<? super T, ? extends R> mapper)
<R> Stream<R> flatMap(Function<? super T, ? extends Stream<? extends R>> mapper)
They do the same thing.
The only difference is that, the lambda return's type is wrapped by Optional or not.
For normal usage, map is shorter than flatMap
Example:
package bj;
import java.util.Optional;
import static java.lang.System.out;
public class App {
public static void main(String[] args) {
out.println(Optional.of(10).map (x -> x * x));
out.println(Optional.of(10).flatMap(x -> Optional.of(x * x)));
out.println(Optional.of(10).map (x -> Optional.of(x * x).get()));
out.println(Optional.<Integer>empty().map (x -> x * x));
out.println(Optional.<Integer>empty().flatMap(x -> Optional.of(x * x)));
out.println(Optional.<Integer>empty().map (x -> Optional.of(x * x).get()));
}
}
Output:
Optional[100]
Optional[100]
Optional[100]
Optional.empty
Optional.empty
Optional.empty

How can I map an optional into a primitive optional?

I know I can map an Optional into an another wrapper type optional.
Optional<Long> millis(Date date) {
return ofNullable(date).map(Date::getTime);
}
How can I map or flatMap into an OptionalLong?
OptionalLong millis(Date date) {
}
I tried but had no luck.
ofNullable(value).flatMap(v -> { // javac has never liked me
return OptionalLong.of(v.getTime());
});
You can use map to get an Optional<OptionalLong> then orElse to remove the outer Optional like this:
OptionalLong millis(Date date) {
return Optional.ofNullable(date).map(Date::getTime)
.map(OptionalLong::of).orElse(OptionalLong.empty());
}
Another (shorter in this case) way is to use the ternary operator instead:
OptionalLong millis(Date date) {
return date == null ? OptionalLong.empty() : OptionalLong.of(date.getTime());
}
Or if you already have the Optional<Long>:
OptionalLong toOptionalLong(Optional<Long> o) {
return o.map(OptionalLong::of).orElse(OptionalLong.empty());
}
OptionalLong toOptionalLong(Optional<Long> o) {
return o.isPresent() ? OptionalLong.of(o.get()) : OptionalLong.empty();
}
Keep in mind that you will take a performance hit in this scenario if you involve Optional<Long> in any way. From Joshua Bloch's Effective Java, 3rd Edition:
"Returning an optional that contains a boxed primitive type is prohibitively expensive compared to returning the primitive type because the optional has two levels of boxing instead of zero. [...] Therefore you should never return an optional of a boxed primitive type, with the possible exception of the "minor primitive types," Boolean, Byte, Character, Short, and Float"
There is no reason to involve Optional here. The best solution is to do the null check yourself, and then return an OptionalLong, e.g.
OptionalLong millis(Date date) {
return date == null ? OptionalLong.empty() : OptionalLong.of(date.getTime());
}
Using the StreamEx library
OptionalLong millis(final Date date) {
return StreamEx.ofNullable(date).mapToLong(Date::getTime).findAny();
}
or
OptionalLong toLong(Optional<Long> o) {
return StreamEx.of(o).mapToLong(Long::longValue).findAny();
}
or
OptionalLong toLong(final Optional<Date> o) {
return StreamEx.of(o).mapToLong(Date::getTime).findAny();
}
I would implement it as follows:
OptionalLong toOptionalLong(Optional<Long> optionalValue) {
return optionalValue.map(OptionalLong::of).orElseGet(OptionalLong::empty);
}
The function OptionalLong::empty is called if and only if the optionalValue is empty.
But I'm not sure I would cast an Optional<Long> into an OptionalLong unless I'm really obliged to. As said in former answers, using a ternary operator is probably a better approach in this case.

Categories