I have a class with a method get done in this way:
public int get(int i) throws ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException {
if(i < numElements)
return elements[i];
else
throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException("");
}
Now I have to make sure that this method works.
I do a test to test the get method on an array of length 0.
So in main I wrote:
try {
IntSortedArray r3 = new IntSortedArray(0); //I create an array of length 0
if( **???** ) {
System.out.println("OK");
}
else {
System.out.println("FAIL");
}
} catch(Exception ecc) {
System.out.println(ecc + " FAIL");
}
What do I put as a condition of the if? Thanks
The class IntSortedArray:
private int[] elements;
private int numElements;
public IntSortedArray(int initialCapacity) {
elements = new int[initialCapacity];
numElements = 0;
System.out.println("Lunghezza dell'array: " + elements.length);
}
You can do
try {
IntSortedArray r3 = new IntSortedArray(0);
r3.get(0);
fail();
} catch(ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException expected) {
}
Okay. So you've got at least two different things to test here:
If the object can be constructed reasonably, and
If you can retrieve an element from the object with respect to its size.
From that, given your constructor, you could construct your object with a non-negative number, as well as a negative number. Further, you could also retrieve a non-negative element in bounds of your array, a non-negative element out of bounds to your array, and a negative element (which is definitely out of bounds) to your array.
There's about five test cases here. I'll use JUnit as an example for you to test the case in which you're trying to pull an element out of your wrapped array, and it is out of bounds. It will pass incidentally, since you're only doing one-half of the check; attempting to index into an array position that is equal to the length is also out of bounds.
// Test will pass due to exception being thrown.
#Test(expected = ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException.class)
public void getWithElementOutOfBounds() {
IntSortedArray r3 = new IntSortedArray(0);
rt.get(0);
}
With the expected portion of the #Test annotation, you can expect certain exceptions to be thrown without needing to provide a conditional, or a try-catch block.
Related
I am doing a project for school that requires us to use arrays to put 'Spherocylinder' objects within the array.
A spherocylinder object consists of (String label, double edge, double height)
I am trying to create a method that takes a (String labelIn) parameter and find a spherocylinder object that matches the parameter given and return it
public Spherocylinder findSpherocylinder(String labelIn) {
for (int i = 0; i < spObjects; i++) {
if (sList[i].getLabel().equalsIgnoreCase(labelIn)) {
return sList[i];
}
else {
return null;
}
}
}
It gives me a missing return statement and don't know how I would go about moving the return to outside of the 'for' statement. The project states that if no object is found to match the parameter it must return 'null'
Remove the else from the for loop and put the return statement outside the loop.
public Spherocylinder findSpherocylinder(String labelIn) {
for (int i = 0; i < spObjects; i++) {
if (sList[i].getLabel().equalsIgnoreCase(labelIn)) {
return sList[i];
}
}
return null;
}
The reason for this is that there might be a case where the for loop may not run even once so the function cannot return anything in that case. Compiler detects this and hence gives an error. It is unlike python where by default function returns a None.
An alternative is to use reduction like this :
public Spherocylinder findSpherocylinder(String labelIn) {
return sList.stream()
.filter(spherocylinder -> spherocylinder.getLabel().equalsIgnoreCase(labelIn))
.reduce((a, b) -> {
throw new IllegalStateException("Multiple elements: " + a + ", " + b);
})
.get();
}
This obtains the sole matching element from the stream, throwing
NoSuchElementException in case the stream is empty, or
IllegalStateException in case the stream contains more than one matching element.
I want to populate an array that I have in my method with elements that I receive as parameters to my method. I cannot use any methods from predefined classes such as Arrays or Collections
Example:
In my main method in my main class I have:
ClassB obj = new ClassB obj ();
obj.addElement(objD1);
obj.addElement(objD2);
What I expect in my method addElement (B Class):
public void addElement(ClassD element){
ClassD[] array = new ClassD[10];
and then how do I populate?
A for loop? Two for loops?
End result I want:
array[0] = objD1;
array[1] = objD2;
The question is not really clear. If my understanding is correct you want to define your ClassB like:
public class ClassB {
private ClassD[] array = new ClassD[10];
private int index;
public void addElement(ClassB element) {
array[index++] = element;
}
}
The code you're asking for is probably array[index++] = element. Here we insert the element inside array in position index and then we increment index (using the post-increment operator ++).
There are few problems with this implementation, though. First of all you can't add more than 10 elements. Adding the 11th element will result in a ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsExcepiton. I would suggest to manage the exception and throw something more descriptive like:
public void addElement(ClassB element) {
if (index >= array.length) {
throw new TooManyElementsException();
}
array[index++] = element;
}
Where TooManyElementsException is simply defined as:
public class TooManyElementsException extends RuntimeException {
}
EDIT
Following your comment, I can slightly modify the addElement() method and get there.
public void addElement(ClassB element) {
int index = 0;
while (index < array.length && array[index] != null) {
index++;
}
if (index >= array.length) {
throw new TooManyElementsException();
}
array[index] = element;
}
The whole thing works because Java always sets all the elements to null when you create a new array. So, every time we start from 0 and we look for the first null position; then, we put our element there.
I am working on a school assignment. The objective is to practice GUI's, clone() methods, and using/ modifying existing code. I am trying to write an equals method in the way the instructor desires-- by using a clone of the object, removing items from the bag (returns boolean based on success or failure to remove).
The bag is represented in an array, and should return true in cases such as {1,2,3} and {3,2,1}, ie order does not matter, only the number of each number present in the arrays.
Here is the issue
It works in most cases, however there is a bug in cases where the bags contain numbers as such: {1,1,2} and {1,2,2} and other similar iterations. It is returning true instead of false.
I believe it has something to do with the remove() method we are supposed to use. If i understand it correctly, it is supposed to put the value at the 'end' of the array and decrease the manyItems counter (this is a variable for number of items in the array, because array.length is by default in the constructor 10.)
The code is largely written by another person. We had to import the existing files and write new methods to complete the task we were given. I have all the GUI part done so i will not include that class, only the used methods in the IntArrayBag class.
A second pair of eyes would be helpful. Thanks.
public class IntArrayBag implements Cloneable
{
// Invariant of the IntArrayBag class:
// 1. The number of elements in the bag is in the instance variable
// manyItems, which is no more than data.length.
// 2. For an empty bag, we do not care what is stored in any of data;
// for a non-empty bag, the elements in the bag are stored in data[0]
// through data[manyItems-1], and we don�t care what�s in the
// rest of data.
private int[ ] data;
private int manyItems;
public IntArrayBag( )
{
final int INITIAL_CAPACITY = 10;
manyItems = 0;
data = new int[INITIAL_CAPACITY];
}
public IntArrayBag clone( )
{ // Clone an IntArrayBag object.
IntArrayBag answer;
try
{
answer = (IntArrayBag) super.clone( );
}
catch (CloneNotSupportedException e)
{ // This exception should not occur. But if it does, it would probably
// indicate a programming error that made super.clone unavailable.
// The most common error would be forgetting the "Implements Cloneable"
// clause at the start of this class.
throw new RuntimeException
("This class does not implement Cloneable");
}
answer.data = data.clone( );
return answer;
}
public int size( )
{
return manyItems;
}
public boolean remove(int target)
{
int index; // The location of target in the data array.
// First, set index to the location of target in the data array,
// which could be as small as 0 or as large as manyItems-1; If target
// is not in the array, then index will be set equal to manyItems;
for (index = 0; (index < manyItems) && (target != data[index]); index++)
// No work is needed in the body of this for-loop.
;
if (index == manyItems)
// The target was not found, so nothing is removed.
return false;
else
{ // The target was found at data[index].
// So reduce manyItems by 1 and copy the last element onto data[index].
manyItems--;
data[index] = data[manyItems];
return true;
}
}
//I added extra variables that are not needed to try to increase readability,
//as well as when i was trying to debug the code originally
public boolean equals(Object obj){
if (obj instanceof IntArrayBag){
IntArrayBag canidate = (IntArrayBag) obj; // i know this can be changed, this was required
IntArrayBag canidateTest = (IntArrayBag) canidate.clone(); //this was created
//as a clone because it was otherwise referring to the same memory address
//this caused items to be removed from bags when testing for equality
IntArrayBag test = (IntArrayBag) this.clone();
//fast check to see if the two objects have the same number of items,
//if they dont will return false and skip the item by item checking
if (test.size() != canidateTest.size())
return false;
//the loop will go through every element in the test bag it will
//then remove the value that is present at the first index of the test bag
for (int i = 0; (i < (test.size()) || i < (canidateTest.size())); i++){
int check = test.data[i];
//remove() returns a boolean so if the value is not present in each bag
//then the conditional will be met and the method will return false
boolean test1 = test.remove(check);
boolean test2 = canidateTest.remove(check);
if (test1 != test2)
return false;
}//end for loop
// if the loop goes through every element
//and finds every value was true it will return true
return true;
}//end if
else
return false;
}//end equals
}
I cannot see the big picture, as I havent coded GUIs in Java before, however, as far as comparing 2 int[] arrays, I would sort the arrays before the comparison. This will allow you to eliminate problem cases like the one you stated ( if sorting is possible), then apply something like:
while(array_1[index]==array_2[index] && index<array_1.length)
{index++;}
and find where did the loop break by checking the final value of index
Is it explicitly stated to use clone? You can achieve it easily by overriding the hashCode() for this Object.
You can override the hashCode() for this object as follows:
#Override
public int hashCode() {
final int prime = 5;
int result = 1;
/* Sort Array */
Arrays.sort(this.data);
/* Calculate Hash */
for(int d : this.data) {
result = prime * result + d;
}
/* Return Result */
return result;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (this == obj) return true;
if (obj == null || this.getClass() != obj.getClass()){
return false;
}
return false;
}
If you want to continue using your implementation for equals to compare test and CandidateTest then also you can compute unique hashes and make decision based on the results.
Here is the code snippet:
/* Assuming that you have put size comparison logic on top
and the two objects are of same size */
final int prime = 31;
int testResult = 1;
int candidateTestResult = 1;
for(int i = 0; i < test.size(); i++) {
testResult = prime * testResult + test.data[i];
candidateTestResult = prime * candidateTestResult + candidateTest.data[i];
}
/* Return Result */
return testResult == candidateTestResult;
I believe the problem is in this line:
for (int i = 0; (i < (test.size()) || i < (canidateTest.size())); i++){
The problem here is that test and canidateTest are the clones that you made, and you are removing elements from those bags. And any time you remove an element from the bag, the size will decrease (because you decrease manyItems, and size() returns manyItems). This means you're only going to go through half the array. Suppose the original size is 4. Then, the first time through the loop, i==0 and test.size()==4; the second time, i==0 and test.size()==3; the third time, i==2 and test.size()==2, and you exit the loop. So you don't look at all 4 elements--you only look at 2.
You'll need to decide: do you want to go through the elements of the original array, or the elements of the clone? If you go through the elements of the clone, you actually never need to increment i. You can always look at test.data[0], since once you look at it, you remove it, so you know test.data[0] will be replaced with something else. In fact, you don't need i at all. Just loop until the bag size is 0, or until you determine that the bags aren't equal. On the other hand, if you go through the elements of this.data (i.e. look at this.data[i] or just data[i]), then make sure i goes all the way up to this.size().
(One more small point: the correct spelling is "candidate".)
Maybe you should try SET interface
view this in detail :http://www.tutorialspoint.com/java/java_set_interface.htm
A set object cannot contains duplicate elements, so it's suitable for your assignment than build your own class.
For example:[1,1,2] and [1,2,2]
you can use this to test whether they are equal
arr1 = {1,1,2}
arr2 = {1,2,2}
Set<Integer> set = new HashSet<Integer>();
for(int i : arr1){//build set of arr1
if(set.contains(i)==false){
set.add(i)
}
}
for(int i:arr2){
if(set.contains(i)==false){
System.out.println('not equal');
break;
}
}
Hope this is helpful.
I'm trying to iterate over an Object array. Using the next() method works so I'm guessing that my iterator class and constructors are working.
For some reason i'm not getting any output while the hasNext() method is running.
Iterator it = hej.iterator();
Object j = it.next();
System.out.println(j);
while(it.hasNext()){
Object i = it.next();
System.out.println(i + " ");
}
With "hej" being my Object array.
My code for the next(); and hasNext() methods are as follows:
public class StackIterator implements Iterator<Object>{
// fields
private int element = 0;
private final Object[] elements;
private final int max;
// constructor
public StackIterator(Object[] values, int maxIndex) {
elements = values;
max = maxIndex;
}
// methods
public boolean hasNext() {
return element < max;
}
public Object next() {
return elements[element++];
}
}
The file that constructs the Object Array and the Object Array depends on an interface:
public interface Stack {
int size();
boolean isEmpty();
void push(Object element);
Object pop();
Object peek();
Iterator<Object> iterator();
}
The methods are then explained in another file:
public class StackExample implements Stack {
// fields
int length = 0;
Object[] arr;
// constructor
public StackExample() {arr = new Object[length];}
// method returns size of object array
public int size() {
return arr.length;
}
// method checks if object is empty
public boolean isEmpty() {
boolean result = false;
if (arr.length == 0){
result = true;
}
return result;
}
// method for push
public void push(Object element) {
newBiggerObj();
arr[0] = element;
}
// returns the first object of the stack
public Object pop() {
Object[] temp = new Object[arr.length-1];
Object first = arr[0];
for (int i = 0; i<arr.length-1; i++){
temp[i] = arr[i+1];
}arr = temp;
return first;
}
// returns the object on top of stack
public Object peek() {
if (isEmpty()){
try{
throw new Exception("Stack empty, can't peek!");
}
catch(Exception e){
return e.getMessage();
}
}
else {
Object first = arr[0];
return first;
}
}
// method for push method
private void newBiggerObj(){
Object[] temp = new Object[arr.length+1];
for (int i = 0; i<arr.length; i++){
temp[i+1] = arr[i];
}
arr = temp;
}
public String toString(){
String str = "";
for (int i = 0; i < arr.length; i++){
str = str + arr[i] + " , ";
}return str;
}
public Iterator<Object> iterator() {
return new StackIterator(arr, length);
}
}
What bothers me is that the method Iterator is within itself returning an instance of the class Stack Iterator. Which i posted above. So my real problem seems to be that my fields are not being given any value, since I am not myself giving the any values within the constructor.
My main method in which I'm testing all of this is as follows:
public class Teststack {
public static void main(String[] args){
// new instane of class StackExample
StackExample hej = new StackExample();
// test for the different methods
System.out.println(hej.isEmpty());
System.out.println(hej.size());
hej.push(4);
hej.push("hej");
hej.push(6);
hej.push(5);
System.out.println(hej.size());
System.out.println(hej.peek());
System.out.println(hej.pop());
System.out.println(hej.toString());
System.out.println(hej.isEmpty());
System.out.println("Testing Iterator: ");
// test for iterator
Iterator it = hej.iterator();
Object j = it.next();
System.out.println(j);
while(it.hasNext()){
Object i = it.next();
System.out.println(i + " ");
}
}
}
In your StackExample class, I don't see the length variable being updated when elements are pushed or popped. Due to this, length will always be 0 and calls to it.hasNext() will always return false.
You don't need to pass the length as a separate argument. You can find the array's length in the StackIterator constructor and use it.
Also note that since you're creating a new array on every push and pop, the iterator returned by StackExample#iterator() will become stale after every push/pop since it will work on an old copy/state of the stack.
The problem is here:
public Iterator<Object> iterator() {
return new StackIterator(arr, length);
}
length field is never changed, so its value is always 0. You can change the code to this:
public Iterator<Object> iterator() {
return new StackIterator(arr, arr.length);
}
Also, before retrieving elements from the iterator, you should always call it.hasNext. The fact you did this:
Iterator it = hej.iterator();
Object j = it.next();
And worked was just pure luck.
Apart of this, I can sense you have a bad design on your stack implementation. Here are some hints to improve your code:
The inner array should be initialized with a default size different than 0. E.g. 10 (as done in java.util.ArrayList implementation).
You should avoid creating a new array when adding (push) or removing (pop) an element from your stack. Instead of this, you should use the length field to control how many elements are in your stack.
The value of the new size should be based on another formula rather than array.length + 1. For example, try using something like int newSize = array.length / 2 * 3;.
Resize the inner array only when necessary. When calling push, do it only if you precisely need to increase the size of the array. When calling pop, do it if the current length of the array (this is, array.length) is far greater than the value of length field of your class.
Never forget to update the value of length on push and pop methods.
Couple of issues:
You are calling Object j = it.next(); after creating iterator and then check for hasNext. You are incrementing the element index. Hence if you just have one element, you wont enter the while loop. In addition, if your custom datastructure is empty i.e. array has no elements then you are prone to ArrayIndexOutOfBoundException.
You will always iterate and print n-1 elements instead to n elements.
Once you iterated, then your pointer will always point to last element and never get resetted. So very next time you wont be able to iterate over your elements. Its a one time iterator.
Try not to call
Object j = it.next() statement, but just while cycle. Seems you have an array of just 1 element.
There are a number of problems with this code:
In the StackIterator constructor there is no bounds checking on maxIndex. Callers can pass in a number greater than values.length, less that 0, etc.
In the next method, there is no check of the end condition, either directly or by calling hasNext(). Callers can keep calling next() and see elements beyond max or even get an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException, when they should be getting a NoSuchElementException.
The Stack class never increments or decrements its length field when elements are pushed or popped.
The Stack class tracks the length separately from the array, even though it always resizes the array on every push or pop, but Java arrays already know their size. (But see the next item.)
The Stack class resizes the array on every push or pop, which is very inefficient. Typically classes like this only resize the array when necessary, allowing 'slack' space, to give amortized constant time performance (see ArrayList). If you do this, however, it is necessary to null out popped items to avoid unintentional object retention.
The Stack adds and removes elements at the beginning of the array. This is incredibly inefficient since it means a O(n) reshuffling must be done on every push or pop.
The peek() method takes into account the possibility that the Stack may be empty, but the pop() method does not. A pop() on an empty Stack will throw an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException.
Stack is not a generic class. It holds Object. Users of the Stack will have to cast the return values from peek() or pop(), and it isn't type safe. In your example, you show a stack that is a heterogeneous mixture of String and Integer. This is a very Java 1.2 way of doing things, and while it isn't necessarily wrong, you should consider parameterizing Stack.
I am trying to delete an element from an array depending on the method's argument. If the argument is the last element's position, I can't use the for loop and end up specifying an if statement just to satisfy that. Also trying to return the current name in that position after the deletion. I have tested and the following code works.
I am trying to see if there is a better way of producing the same result without the extra if statement. I tried looking up the Arrays Class and no static method there that seems to help either. Please advice if there is a better way of doing this method. Thanks.
public class ArrayTester {
public static String[] array1 = new String[100];
public static void main(String[] args) {
remove(50);
System.out.println(remove(50));
}
public static String remove(int name) {
if(name == 99){
array1[name] = null;
return array1[name];
}
else if (name >= 0 && name < 99){
for (int i=name; i < array1.length-1; i++){
array1[i] = array1[i+1];
}
return array1[name];
}
return null;
}
}
And with ArrayList??
import java.util.ArrayList;
public class RemoveArrayListElement {
public static void main(String[] args) {
ArrayList<String> arlist=new ArrayList<String>();
//<E> it is return type of ArrayList
arlist.add("First Element"); // adding element in ArrayList
arlist.add("Second Element");
arlist.add("Third Element");
arlist.add("forth Element");
arlist.add("fifth Element");
// remove array list element by index number
arlist.remove(3);
// remove ArrayList element by Object value
arlist.remove("fifth Element");
// get elements of ArrayList
for(int i=0;i<arlist.size();i++)
{
System.out.println("ArrayList Element "+i+" :"+arlist.get(i));
}
}
}
Output:
Remove ArrayList Element 0 :First Element
Remove ArrayList Element 1 :Second Element
Remove ArrayList Element 2 :Third Element
With ArrayList is easier, isn't it?
You can simplify your code a little by excluding the if. Unfortunately, the loop has to stay - arrays provide contiguous storage, so you need to move the data if you are to delete an item in the middle of the array.
public static String remove(int index) {
// Note the use of "index" instead of "name"
if (index < 0 || index >= array1.length) {
// A more common approach is to throw an exception,
// but your code returns null for out-of-range index
return null;
}
for (int i = index; i < array1.length-1 ; i++) {
array1[i] = array1[i+1];
}
// Unconditionally set null in the last element of the array
array1[array1.length-1] = null;
return array1[index];
}
Looking at your code, you seem to want something like this -
if (name == 99) {
try {
return array1[name];
} finally {
array1[name] = null;
}
}
array1 = Arrays.copyOf(array1, 99);
Sounds to me like you would be better off using an ArrayList. Arrays aren't really made for what you're doing. But you could also just null the value at the desired location and run the java.util.Arrays.sort method on the array. Something like this (I'm winging it, but this would be close):
public static String remove(int name) {
String returnValue = array1[name];
array1[name] = null;
java.util.Arrays.sort(array1);
return returnValue;
}
This is going to leave you with a sorted array, but you're already shifting them out of their original indices anyway so that may or may not matter to you.
Another option would be to simply add a if (array1[index] != null) conditional to all of your code handling that array. That way you wouldn't have to shift your values around in the array and your code would just skip over any null values it runs into.