Issue with Object Comparison in Java (Context is RB Tree) - java

High, I'm mostly familiar with C & C++ but I've been trying my hand at java recently.
My issue is that line if (parent.leftChild == temp) is never true. Although parent.leftChild.Key = temp.key (and the rest of the contents are the same), I'm under the impression that the issue is that parent.leftChild's ID in Eclipse's debugger = ...5792 while temp's ID is ...3632.
I was hoping that someone could further explain. A workaround to my code can always be to change the if statement to if (parent.leftChild.key = temp.key), but shouldn't parent.left == temp be valid?
class Node{
int key;
char color;
Node leftChild;
Node rightChild;
Node parent;
//...constructors..//
}
private Node GetParent(Node node){
if(node != null)
return node.parent;
else
return null;
}
private void RemoveNodeFromTree(Node myNode){
Node temp = new Node(myNode);
//traverse
if(temp.leftChild!= null){
temp = temp.leftChild;
while(temp.rightChild!= null)
temp = temp.rightChild;
myNode.key = temp.key;
}
else if(temp.rightChild != null)
myNode.key = temp.rightChild.key;
Node parent = GetParent(temp);
Node childL = temp.leftChild;
Node childR = temp.rightChild;
//have parent point to the proper new node.
//parent points to left if it exists, then it tries right.
//if both are null, point to right anyway
if(parent !=null ){
//replace temp with it's left child
if(childL!= null){
if (parent.leftChild == temp)
parent.leftChild = childL;
else
parent.rightChild = childL;
childL.parent = parent;
childL.color = 'B';
if(childL.color == 'B' && temp.color == 'B')
DoubleBlackRestructure(childL, parent);
}
else //replace temp with it's right child
{
if (parent.leftChild == temp)
parent.leftChild = childR;
else
parent.rightChild = childR;
if(childR!= null)
childR.parent = parent;
if((childR == null || childR.color == 'B') && temp.color == 'B')
{
if(childR != null)
childR.color = 'B';
DoubleBlackRestructure(childR, parent);
}
else if (childR != null)
childR.color = 'B';
}
}
else
myNode = null;
temp = null;
}

Every object in Java represents a reference type. Typically, a reference is the memory address at which the object or array is stored. However, since Java references are opaque and cannot be manipulated in any way, this is an implementation detail. Therefore Java doesn't really have pointers like C++ but it has references to objects.
As for your problem, using the workaround you suggested should be the easiest and simplest way to solve your problem. However, if you want to compare objects in Java in general, here is how you do it.
Java has two kinds of object equality:
Object reference equality : when two object references point to the same object.
if (obj1 == obj2) {
// The two object references point to the same object
}
Object value equality : when two separate objects happen to have the same values/state.
if(obj1.equals(obj2)) {
// two object references contain "equal" objects
}
The reason "equal" is in quotes is because it is up to us to say when exactly are two objects equal.
To be able to value-compare two Java objects of the same class, the boolean equals(Object obj) method must be overridden and implemented by the class.
Note that equal objects must have equal hash codes. Therefore, when overriding the equals method, we must also override the hashCode method. Failure to do so violates the general contract for the hashCode method, and any classes that use the hash code, such as HashMap will not function properly.
We decide which values must be equal to consider two objects to be equal. In your case, you could just override the equals() method without the hashCode since you are not putting Node objects in any containers that require a properly implemented hashCode but you should be aware of the possible consequences. The equals() method inside the Node class could compare nodes based on their keys and would look something like:
class Node {
int key;
char color;
Node leftChild;
Node rightChild;
Node parent;
//...constructors..//
boolean equals(Object obj) {
//null instanceof Object will always return false
if (!(obj instanceof Node)) {
return false;
}
// each object is obviously equal to itself
if (obj == this) {
return true;
}
return this.key == ((Node) obj).key;
}
/* This is a simple example of how to override the hashCode as well.
public int hashCode() {
// some code to represent each node uniquely
// i just assume each node has a unique key
return this.key
}
*/
}
Then you can just use the following statement in your code:
if (parent.leftChild.key.equals(temp.key))
The advantage of using equals() implementation is that you can define object equality in many specific ways so it is a quite flexible solution.
Here is a good stackoverflow thread on this
Here is another useful read

Related

Question on overriding equals & calling equals recursively

So I overwrote an equals function that works with Nodes that contain objects. and it looks like this.
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (this == obj) return true;
if (obj == null) return false;
// Checks if obj is from the same class as this Deque.
if (obj.getClass() != this.getClass()) return false;
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
// If obj is from the same class, casts object to DoublyLinkedDeque.
DoublyLinkedDeque<T> object = (DoublyLinkedDeque<T>) obj;
Node other = object.front;
Node self = this.front;
// Checks the info of every Node in this Deque with the other.
while (self != null && other != null) { // Checks
if (!(self.info.equals(other.info))) return false;
self = self.next;
other = other.next;
}
// Otherwise, checks if the front of both Deques is null.
return (self == null && other == null);
}
And it works but I'm not sure how the second invocation of equals work. Specifically how does my code check if the info field (that contains objects) of two nodes are equal without calling super.equals? Nothing in my function has the capability to check if two objects are equal as far as I know, can someone explain this?

finding loop in linked list using HashMap in java

i am writing code for lop detection in linked list using hashmap. why it goes in infinite loop?
boolean hasCycle(Node head) {
HashMap<Integer,Node> map = new HashMap<Integer,Node>();
//<Address,data>
if(head == null || head.next == null)
return false;
Node p = head;
while(p.next!=null)
{
if(map.containsValue(p.next))
{
return true;
}
else
{
map.put(p.data,p.next);
}
p = p.next;
}
return false;
}
Use the Node as key and the data field as value and then check whether the HashMap contains the key:
boolean hasCycle(Node head) {
HashMap<Node,Integer> map = new HashMap<Node,Integer>();
if(head == null || head.next == null)
return false;
Node p = head;
while(p.next!=null) {
if (map.containsKey(p.next)) {
return true;
} else {
map.put(p.next,p.data);
}
p = p.next;
}
return false;
}
And also follow the Java Code Conventions.
Your code calls
map.containsValue(p.next)
This method iterates through the whole map looking for an object that is equal to the passed argument. To do that, it calls your Node.equals() method. It is highly probable that this is where it's going into an infinite loop.
To solve it, you could just use a HashSet of the Node objects (as mentioned in the comments) and check that your equals() and hashCode() methods are correct. But there is also another way to check for cycles, which doesn't involve the use of any extra memory. You just use two iterators, one going at half the speed of the other. If there is a cycle, the faster iterator will lap the slower one.
Have you defined .equals() and .hashCode() on your Node class? if not, it defaults to ==, and if the HashMap makes a copy of your Node as it inserts or moves it in memory, and then your equivalence would fail, because == compares memory addresses.
assuming your node class is akin to
public class Node{
public int data;
public Node next;
}
you could define them as
#Override
public int hashCode(){
int nextData=next.data;
return data^nextData;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object other){
boolean equal=false;
if(other!=null&&other instanceof Node){
Node otherNode=(Node)other;
if(otherNode.data==data){
if(otherNode.next==null&&next==null){
equal=true;
}else if(otherNode.next!=null&&next!=null){
if(otherNode.next.data==next.data){
equal=true;
}
}
}
}
return equal;
}

Java : Merging two sorted linked lists

I have developed a code to merge two already sorted linked lists in java.
I need help with the following:
How do I retain the value of head node of merged list without using tempNode?
Can this code be better optimized?
public static ListNode mergeSortedListIteration(ListNode nodeA, ListNode nodeB) {
ListNode mergedNode ;
ListNode tempNode ;
if (nodeA == null) {
return nodeB;
}
if (nodeB == null) {
return nodeA;
}
if ( nodeA.getValue() < nodeB.getValue())
{
mergedNode = nodeA;
nodeA = nodeA.getNext();
}
else
{
mergedNode = nodeB;
nodeB = nodeB.getNext();
}
tempNode = mergedNode;
while (nodeA != null && nodeB != null)
{
if ( nodeA.getValue() < nodeB.getValue())
{
mergedNode.setNext(nodeA);
nodeA = nodeA.getNext();
}
else
{
mergedNode.setNext(nodeB);
nodeB = nodeB.getNext();
}
mergedNode = mergedNode.getNext();
}
if (nodeA != null)
{
mergedNode.setNext(nodeA);
}
if (nodeB != null)
{
mergedNode.setNext(nodeB);
}
return tempNode;
}
1: You have to keep a record of the first node, which means you will have to store it in a variable such as tempNode.
2: No. There's not much to optimize here. The process is quite trivial.
There are a few possibilities:
1) Instead of using mergedNode to keep track of the previous node, use nodeA.getNext().getValue() and nodeB.getNext().getValue(). Your algorithm will become more complex and you will have to deal with a few edge cases, but it is possible to eliminate one of your variables.
2) Use a doubly linked-list, and then use either nodeA.getPrev().getValue() and nodeB.getPrev().getValue() instead of mergedNode. You will also have to deal with edge cases here too.
In order to deal with edge cases, you will have to guarantee that your references can not possibly be null before calling getPrev(), getNext() or getValue(), or else you will throw an exception.
Note that the above modifications sacrifice execution time slightly and (more importantly) simplicity in order to eliminate a variable. Any gains would be marginal, and developer time is far more important than shaving a microsecond or two off of your operation.

check if an object is null

I have a linked list in which first node contains null object. means firstNode.data is equal to null, firstNode.nextPointer = null, firstNode.previousPointer = null.
And I want to check if firstNode is null or not.
So I tried-
if(list.firstNode == null){
//do stuff
}
but this doesn't works?
I also tried equals too. Any suggestions?
I tried printing. And I got as-
{null} -- firstNode
I think your firstNode is not null, but its fields are. Try something like this:
if (list.firstNode.data == null) {
//do stuff
}
Did you try
if (list.firstNode.data == null) { /* Do stuff */ }
You checking for list.firstNode being null. Do you mean to check for
list.firstNode.data==null
The answer is in the question. You said:
have a linked list in which first node contains null object. **means firstNode.data is equal to null**,
This means you should do the following instead:
if(list.firstNode.data == null){
//do stuff
}
It seems to me that your question is related to the processing of a doubly-linked list.
To check if empty use: (list.firstNode.next == list.firstNode.previous) this is true for an empty doubly linked list.
You can check if all the fields of the node are null:
Node firstNode = list.firstNode;
if(firstNode.data == null &&
firstNode.nextPointer == null &&
firstNode.previousPointer == null) {
//Do stuff
}
Or to prevent code repetition, you can either create an instance method isNull() to do the test or create a NULL object and override the equals method in your Node class to check if a node is equal to the null node as you described.
class Node<E> {
//The null node, assuming your constructor takes all three values.
public static final Node NULL = new Node(null, null, null);
//Fields here with constructors etc.
#Override
public void equals(Object obj) {
if(!obj instanceof Node) return false;
Node<?> node = (Node<?>)obj;
if(node.data.equals(this.data) &&
node.nextPointer == this.nextPointer &&
node.previousPointer == this.previousPointer) {
return true;
} else {
return false;
}
}
Then when you want to check if a node is null you can do:
if(list.firstNode.equals(Node.NULL)) {
//Do stuff
}

Contains for List of Pair

List<Pair<String, String> > lp = new ArrayList<Pair<String, String> >();
lp.add(new Pair("1", "2"));
How should I check if the list lp contains 1 and 2 i.e the Pair ("1", "2").
Your Pair class needs to implement equals() and hashCode() and you're all set. List.contains() is implemented in terms of the type's equals() method. See the API for List.contains(). (Edited a bit to address comments from #maaartinus, whose answer you should read b/c the observations are solid, and it's a bit ridiculous for me to fold them in here. As maaartinus points out, a best-practice here would be to avoid error-prone manual definitions for equals and hashcode, and instead build on Guava's helper functions for nullable equals and hashCode for n objects).
final class Pair<T> {
final T left;
final T right;
public Pair(T left, T right)
{
if (left == null || right == null) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("left and right must be non-null!");
}
this.left = left;
this.right = right;
}
public boolean equals(Object o)
{
// see #maaartinus answer
if (! (o instanceof Pair)) { return false; }
Pair p = (Pair)o;
return left.equals(p.left) && right.equals(p.right);
}
public int hashCode()
{
return 7 * left.hashCode() + 13 * right.hashCode();
}
}
With suitable equals(), you can now do:
lp.add(new Pair("1", "2"));
assert lp.contains(new Pair("1","2"));
Responding to the comments below, perhaps it would be good to include a good reference for "Why do I need to implement hashCode()?"
JavaPractices.com — Implementing equals() — "if you override equals, you must override hashCode"
Object.equals() contract as defined in the API documentation
StackOverflow answer
The implementation in the answer by andersoj
return left != null && right != null && left.equals(p.left) && right.equals(p.right);
is wrong: The null tests clearly suggest that null is a legal value for left and right. So there are at least two problems there:
new Pair(null, null).hashCode() throws NPE
new Pair(null, null) does NOT equal to itself!
Have a look at Guava class Objects for a correct implementation. Use it or write a static helper methods like
public static boolean equal(Object a, Object b) {
return a==b || a!=null && a.equals(b);
}
public static int hashCode(Object a) {
return a==null ? 0 : a.hashCode();
}
and always use them.
Never ever write equals containing a null test.
It's to easy to blow it, and nobody noticed it. Using the Helper, it's trivial to get it right:
public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (!(o instanceof Pair)) return false;
Pair p = (Pair) o;
return Helper.equals(left, p.left) && Helper.equals(right, p.right);
}
public int hashCode() {
return 7 * Helper.hashCode(left) + 13 * Helper.hashCode(right);
}
Of course, forbidding nulls in the constructor is an option, too.

Categories