We Keep Coding

How to print elements from generic array list, using iterator in Java

I'm working in a school project, where I want to implement the Iterator design pattern. I want to use generic arrays.
Container.java
public interface Container {
Iterator getIterator();
}
Iterator.java
public interface Iterator <T> {
boolean hasNext();
T next();
}
TransactionRepository.java
public class TransactionRepository<T> implements Container {
public TransactionRepository(){
userTransactions = new ArrayList<>();
}
public List<T> userTransactions;
#Override
public Iterator <T> getIterator() {
return new UserTransactions();
}
private T t;
public void add(T t) {
this.t = t;
}
public T get() {
return t;
}
private class UserTransactions implements Iterator <T> {
int index;
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
return index < userTransactions.size();
}
#Override
public T next() {
if(this.hasNext())
return userTransactions.get(index);
return null;
}
}
}
In my other class, I add the elements to the list by first creating the TransactionRepository object like this: TransactionRepository<String> companyName = new TransactionRepository<String>();.
Then I add elements to the array with the add method companyName.add("CompanyName");. After that I want to print the array using Iterator, but It just won't print the elements. I have tried multiple variations, but none of them worked.
Iterator <String> stringIterator = companyName.getIterator();
while (stringIterator.hasNext()) {
System.out.println("Name : " + companyName.get());
}

With the current implementation List<T> userTransactions is never updated.
In this case userTransactions.size() in hasNext() method will always return 0 so the result of method will be false.
Moreover, you should use stringIterator.next() instead of companyName.get(). Since you implement your own iterator you don't want to use get() method at all.
There is also a need to update index counter variable after calling next() method.
#Override
public T next() {
if (this.hasNext())
return userTransactions.get(index++);
return null;
}
Change modifier on userTransactions to private final as it should be referenced just with iterator.
Code with proposed improvements:
public class TransactionRepository<T> implements Container {
public TransactionRepository() {
userTransactions = new ArrayList<>();
}
public List<T> userTransactions;
#Override
public Iterator<T> getIterator() {
return new UserTransactions();
}
public void add(T t) {
userTransactions.add(t);
}
private class UserTransactions implements Iterator<T> {
int index;
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
return index < userTransactions.size();
}
#Override
public T next() {
if (this.hasNext()) {
return userTransactions.get(index++);
}
return null;
}
}
}

It seems that you are never adding elements to your userTransactions List on the add method

You add() method doesnt add anything to your list , it's just like a setter of the attribute t , you should use it to add elements to the list instead
public void add(T t) {
userTransactions.add(t);
}
There is also another problem , the index , your next() method gets the index element while you didnt initialise your index variable , i recommand you to do it in this way :
int index = 0 ;
...
public T next() {
if(this.hasNext())
int temp = index;
index++;
return userTransactions.get(temp);
return null;
}

Sorting by enum on adding to Set

I need to create priority set/array that bases on:
public interface IListener
{
public Priority getPriority();
public enum Priority
{
HIGHEST,
HIGH,
NORMAL,
LOW,
LOWEST;
}
}
IListeners are stored in:
HashMap<Class<? extends IListener>, Set<IListener>> listeners = new HashMap<>();
I am looking to make method that will always add IListener in 1st place after its Priority group.
Example:
Given Set contains some IListeners with this order.
{ HIGHEST, HIGHEST, HIGH, HIGH, LOW, LOW, LOW, LOWEST }
Adding listener with Priority == HIGH would result in:
{ HIGHEST, HIGHEST, HIGH, HIGH, HIGH, LOW, LOW, LOW, LOWEST }
Bold one being newly added.
I know I could just iterate and add at 1st "free slot", but question is rather - does Java provide some good-looking (maybe better?) solutions? Might be just for future reference.

As indicated in the comments, I don't think there is any collection in the JDK that exactly meets your requirements.
IListenerSet is an implementation of Set that meets your needs. The iterator always returns the elements in order of priority. If two elements have the same priority, they are returned in the order they were put into the set. The set supports addition and removal. The iterator supports the remove() method. The set cannot contain null, and throws a NullPointerException if you try to add null. The set cannot contain an IListener for which getPriority() returns null, and throws an IllegalArgumentException if you try to add such an element.
public final class IListenerSet<T extends IListener> extends AbstractSet<T> {
private final Map<IListener.Priority, Set<T>> map;
public IListenerSet() {
map = new EnumMap<>(IListener.Priority.class);
for (IListener.Priority p : IListener.Priority.values())
map.put(p, new LinkedHashSet<>());
}
public IListenerSet(Collection<? extends T> collection) {
this();
addAll(collection);
}
#Override
public int size() {
int size = 0;
for (Set<T> set : map.values())
size += set.size();
return size;
}
#Override
public boolean contains(Object o) {
if (!(o instanceof IListener))
return false;
IListener listener = (IListener) o;
IListener.Priority p = listener.getPriority();
return p != null && map.get(p).contains(listener);
}
#Override
public boolean add(T listener) {
IListener.Priority p = listener.getPriority();
if (p == null)
throw new IllegalArgumentException();
return map.get(p).add(listener);
}
#Override
public boolean remove(Object o) {
if (!(o instanceof IListener))
return false;
IListener listener = (IListener) o;
IListener.Priority p = listener.getPriority();
return p != null && map.get(p).remove(listener);
}
#Override
public void clear() {
for (Set<T> set : map.values())
set.clear();
}
#Override
public Iterator<T> iterator() {
return new Iterator<T>() {
private Iterator<T> iterator = map.get(IListener.Priority.values()[0]).iterator();
private int nextIndex = 1;
private Iterator<T> nextIterator = null;
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
if (iterator.hasNext() || nextIterator != null)
return true;
IListener.Priority[] priorities = IListener.Priority.values();
while (nextIndex < priorities.length) {
Set<T> set = map.get(priorities[nextIndex++]);
if (!set.isEmpty()) {
nextIterator = set.iterator();
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
#Override
public T next() {
if (iterator.hasNext())
return iterator.next();
if (!hasNext())
throw new NoSuchElementException();
iterator = nextIterator;
nextIterator = null;
return iterator.next();
}
#Override
public void remove() {
iterator.remove();
}
};
}
}

An alternative approach is to use TreeSet with custom comparator and automatically assign autogenerated ids to the elements added to the set, so the latter elements always get bigger id which can be used in comparison:
public class IListenerSet extends AbstractSet<IListener> {
private long maxId = 0;
private final Map<IListener, Long> ids = new HashMap<>();
private final Set<IListener> set = new TreeSet<>(new Comparator<IListener>() {
#Override
public int compare(IListener o1, IListener o2) {
int res = o1.getPriority().compareTo(o2.getPriority());
if(res == 0)
res = ids.get(o1).compareTo(ids.get(o2));
return res;
}
});
#Override
public Iterator<IListener> iterator() {
return new Iterator<IListener>() {
Iterator<IListener> it = set.iterator();
private IListener e;
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
return it.hasNext();
}
#Override
public IListener next() {
this.e = it.next();
return e;
}
#Override
public void remove() {
it.remove();
ids.remove(e);
}
};
}
#Override
public int size() {
return set.size();
}
#Override
public boolean contains(Object o) {
return ids.containsKey(o);
}
#Override
public boolean add(IListener e) {
if(ids.get(e) != null)
return false;
// assign new id and store it in the internal map
ids.put(e, ++maxId);
return set.add(e);
}
#Override
public boolean remove(Object o) {
if(!ids.containsKey(o)) return false;
set.remove(o);
return true;
}
#Override
public void clear() {
ids.clear();
set.clear();
}
}

Keep it easy:
You can combine several kinds of collections:
A LinkedHashSet allows you to store items by ordering them by insertion order (and with no repeated items).
A TreeMap allows you to map keys and values ordering them according to the keys.
Thus, you can declare this combination:
TreeMap<IListener.Priority, LinkedHashSet<IListener>> listenersByPriority=new TreeMap<IListener.Priority, LinkedHashSet<IListener>>(new PriorityComparator());
... and encapsulate it in a proper abstraction to manage it:
public class ListenerManager
{
private final TreeMap<IListener.Priority, LinkedHashSet<IListener>> listenersByPriority=new TreeMap<IListener.Priority, LinkedHashSet<IListener>>();
private int size;
public void addListener(IListener listener)
{
synchronized (listenersByPriority)
{
LinkedHashSet<IListener> list=listenersByPriority.get(listener.getPriority());
if (list == null)
{
list=new LinkedHashSet<IListener>();
listenersByPriority.put(listener.getPriority(), list);
}
list.add(listener);
size++;
}
}
public Iterator<IListener> iterator()
{
synchronized (listenersByPriority)
{
List<IListener> output=new ArrayList<IListener>(size);
for (LinkedHashSet<IListener> list : listenersByPriority.values())
{
for (IListener listener : list)
{
output.add(listener);
}
}
return output.iterator();
}
}
}
When declaring a TreeMap, it is usually necessary an specific implementation of Comparator coupled to the key class, but it is not necessary in this case, because enums are already comparable by its ordinal. (thanks to Paul Boddington). And the ordinal of each enum item is the position it is placed in the declaration.

Java ListSet somewhere?

Looking for a insertion order collection that also allows efficient querying and subset views of positions (like sublist). Seems the most straightforward option for this would be to take the linked list approach of List, embed the nodes as map values and expose part or all of the list interface on the class.
Would someone bitch to Oracle about this? Having NavigableMap/Set added for sorted maps and sets and not having the far more common insertion order equivalent...
edit: please don't suggest LinkedHashSet - it doesn't have any way to query the position or to do a relative subset.

you mean like java.util.LinkedHashSet:
Hash table and linked list implementation of the Set interface, with
predictable iteration order. This implementation differs from HashSet
in that it maintains a doubly-linked list running through all of its
entries. This linked list defines the iteration ordering, which is the
order in which elements were inserted into the set (insertion-order).
Note that insertion order is not affected if an element is re-inserted
into the set. (An element e is reinserted into a set s if s.add(e) is
invoked when s.contains(e) would return true immediately prior to the
invocation.)

edit2: New final version
Here is a version only for sets with slightly adjusted function (divided into two, no longer accepts null as 'beginning of the map') that probably has less bugs
public class LinkedSet<E> implements Set<E> {
private LinkedHashMap<E, Integer> m = new LinkedHashMap<E, Integer>();
private int monoticallyIncreasing;
/**
* Returns true if the value target was added before (exclusive)
* limitElem in insertion order.
*
* If target or limit are not present on the set this method returns false
*
* #param limitElem a E that may be a element of the set or not.
* #return if target was added before limit (can be reset by removing and
* re-adding the target, that changes iteration order).
*/
public boolean containsBefore(E target, E limitElem) {
if (isEmpty()) {
return false;
}
Integer targetN = m.get(target);
if (targetN == null) {
return false;
}
Integer highN = m.get(limitElem);
if (highN == null) {
return false;
}
return targetN < highN;
}
/**
* Returns true if the value target was added after (exclusive)
* previousElem in insertion order.
*
* If target or previous are not present on the set this method returns false
*
* #param previousElem a E that may be a element of the set or not.
* #return if target was added before previous (can be reset by removing and
* re-adding the target, that changes iteration order).
*/
public boolean containsAfter(E target, E previousElem) {
if (isEmpty()) {
return false;
}
Integer targetN = m.get(target);
if (targetN == null) {
return false;
}
Integer low = m.get(previousElem);
if (low == null) {
return false;
}
return low < targetN;
}
#Override
public boolean add(E e) {
Integer pos = m.get(e);
if (pos == null) {
m.put(e, monoticallyIncreasing++);
return true;
}
return false;
}
#Override
public int size() {
return m.size();
}
#Override
public boolean isEmpty() {
return m.isEmpty();
}
#Override
public boolean contains(Object o) {
return m.containsKey(o);
}
#Override
public Object[] toArray() {
Object[] result = new Object[size()];
int i = 0;
for (E e : this) {
result[i++] = e;
}
return result;
}
#Override
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
public <T> T[] toArray(T[] a) {
int size = size();
if (a.length < size) {
a = (T[]) java.lang.reflect.Array.newInstance(a.getClass().getComponentType(), size);
}
int i = 0;
Object[] result = a;
for (E e : this) {
result[i++] = e;
}
if (a.length > size) {
//peculiar toArray contract where it doesn't care about the rest
a[size] = null;
}
return a;
}
#Override
public boolean remove(Object o) {
return m.remove(o) != null;
}
#Override
public boolean addAll(Collection<? extends E> c) {
boolean changed = false;
for (E e : c) {
changed |= add(e);
}
return changed;
}
#Override
public boolean containsAll(Collection<?> c) {
return m.keySet().containsAll(c);
}
#Override
public boolean retainAll(Collection<?> c) {
return m.keySet().retainAll(c);
}
#Override
public boolean removeAll(Collection<?> c) {
return m.keySet().removeAll(c);
}
#Override
public void clear() {
m.clear();
}
#Override
public Iterator<E> iterator() {
return m.keySet().iterator();
}
}

How do I write a method which would work on both lists and arrays?

I have a method which looks like this:
void foo (List<String> list, ...) {
...
for (String s : list) { // this is the only place where `list` is used
...
}
...
}
the exact same code would work if I replace List<String> list with String[] list, however, to avoid spaghetti code, I keep the single method, and when I need to call it on an array a, I do it like this: foo(Arrays.asList(a)).
I wonder if this is The Right Way.
Specifically,
What is the overhead of Arrays.asList()?
Is there a way to write a method which would accept both arrays and lists, just like the for loop does?
Thanks!

Arrays.asList() has a small overhead. There is no real way to implement one method for both List and arrays.
But you can do the following:
void foo (List<String> list, ...) {
...
for (String s : list) { // this is the only place where *list* is used
...
}
...
}
void foo (String[] arr, ...) {
if ( arr != null ) {
foo(Arrays.asList(arr),...);
}
}

From the source code of openjdk, Arrays.asList:
public static <T> List<T> asList(T... a) {
return new ArrayList<>(a);
}
furthermore:
ArrayList(E[] array) {
if (array==null)
throw new NullPointerException();
a = array;
}
So basically all that happens in an assignment, so the overhead should be negligible.

The overhead is that it converts an array to a list--how it does so would be implementation-dependent, it only needs to fulfill the contract.
IMO you should write two methods if you're concerned about the potential runtime overhead: that is the nature of Java; methods have type signatures, and they must be obeyed.

Do avoid this I just use and allow Lists, Sets and Maps (like Joshua Bloch told us). There is no way to merge both "collection types".
An alternative is to use guava (Iterators/Iteratables). So you can iterarte over your collections without a deep copy of them.

Good question.
This is a very common case, and is often dealt with by writing two separate methods. However code duplication is really a bad idea, and whenever you find yourself duplicating code, you should start looking for opportunities to factor your code better. (As you are doing right now!)
Now if you look into the source of java.util.Arrays, you will notice that Arrays.asList retruns an instance of a private inner class Arrays.ArrayList which is just a thin wrapper over plain arrays, and delegates all relevant method calls to it. (This is known as a projection or view of a data structure.) Therefore the overhead incurred is insignificant (unless you are striving to extract every last bit of performance), and in my opinion, you should go ahead and use this method without worrying about performance.
The solution I personally use is as follows.
I have a class named RichIterable in my personal utils. As the name indicates the class wraps over Iterable and provides some additional useful methods not already present. The class also has a factory method that creates an RichIterable from an array. Here is the class definition.
public class RichIterable<A> implements Iterable<A> {
private Iterable<A> xs;
private RichIterable(Iterable<A> xs) {
this.xs = xs;
}
public static <A> RichIterable<A> from(Iterable<A> xs) {
if (xs instanceof RichIterable) {
return (RichIterable<A>) xs;
} else {
return new RichIterable<A>(xs);
}
}
public static <A> RichIterable<A> from(final Enumeration<A> xs) {
Iterable<A> iterable = new Iterable<A>() {
#Override
public Iterator<A> iterator() {
return new Iterator<A>() {
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
return xs.hasMoreElements();
}
#Override
public A next() {
return xs.nextElement();
}
#Override
public void remove() {
throw new UnsupportedOperationException(
"Cannot remove an element from an enumeration.");
}
};
}
};
return RichIterable.from(iterable);
}
public static <A> RichIterable<A> from(final A[] xs) {
Iterable<A> iterable = new Iterable<A>() {
#Override
public Iterator<A> iterator() {
return new Iterator<A>() {
private int i = 0;
#Override
public boolean hasNext() {
return i < xs.length;
}
#Override
public A next() {
A x = xs[i];
i++;
return x;
}
#Override
public void remove() {
throw new UnsupportedOperationException(
"Cannot remove an element from an array.");
}
};
}
};
return RichIterable.from(iterable);
}
public boolean isEmpty() {
if (xs instanceof Collection) {
return ((Collection) xs).isEmpty();
}
for (A x : xs) {
return false;
}
return true;
}
public int size() {
if (xs instanceof Collection) {
return ((Collection) xs).size();
}
int size = 0;
for (A x : xs) {
size++;
}
return size;
}
public ArrayList<A> toArrayList() {
ArrayList<A> ys = new ArrayList<A>();
for (A x : xs) {
ys.add(x);
}
return ys;
}
public <B> RichIterable<B> map(F1<A, B> f) {
List<B> ys = new ArrayList<B>();
for (A x : xs) {
ys.add(f.apply(x));
}
return RichIterable.from(ys);
}
public RichIterable<A> filter(F1<A, Boolean> pred) {
List<A> ys = new ArrayList<A>();
Arrays.asList();
for (A x : xs) {
if (pred.apply(x)) {
ys.add(x);
}
}
return RichIterable.from(ys);
}
public boolean exists(F1<A, Boolean> pred) {
for (A x : xs) {
if (pred.apply(x)) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
public boolean forall(F1<A, Boolean> pred) {
for (A x : xs) {
if (!pred.apply(x)) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
public Maybe<A> find(F1<A, Boolean> pred) {
for (A x : xs) {
if (pred.apply(x)) {
return Just.of(x);
}
}
return Nothing.value();
}
public String mkString(String beg, String sep, String end) {
Iterator<A> i = xs.iterator();
if (!i.hasNext()) {
return beg + end;
}
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
sb.append(beg);
while (true) {
A e = i.next();
sb.append(e.toString());
if (!i.hasNext()) {
return sb.append(end).toString();
}
sb.append(sep);
}
}
public String mkString(String sep) {
return mkString("", sep, "");
}
public String mkString() {
return this.mkString(", ");
}
public Iterable<A> getRaw() {
return xs;
}
#Override
public Iterator<A> iterator() {
return xs.iterator();
}
}

Is there a fixed sized queue which removes excessive elements?

I need a queue with a fixed size. When I add an element and the queue is full, it should automatically remove the oldest element.
Is there an existing implementation for this in Java?

Actually the LinkedHashMap does exactly what you want. You need to override the removeEldestEntry method.
Example for a queue with max 10 elements:
queue = new LinkedHashMap<Integer, String>()
{
#Override
protected boolean removeEldestEntry(Map.Entry<Integer, String> eldest)
{
return this.size() > 10;
}
};
If the "removeEldestEntry" returns true, the eldest entry is removed from the map.

Yes, Two
From my own duplicate question with this correct answer, I learned of two:
EvictingQueue in Google Guava
CircularFifoQueue in Apache Commons
I made productive use of the Guava EvictingQueue, worked well.
To instantiate an EvictingQueue call the static factory method create and specify your maximum size.
EvictingQueue< Person > people = com.google.common.collect.EvictingQueue.create( 100 ) ; // Set maximum size to 100.

I just implemented a fixed size queue this way:
public class LimitedSizeQueue<K> extends ArrayList<K> {
private int maxSize;
public LimitedSizeQueue(int size){
this.maxSize = size;
}
public boolean add(K k){
boolean r = super.add(k);
if (size() > maxSize){
removeRange(0, size() - maxSize);
}
return r;
}
public K getYoungest() {
return get(size() - 1);
}
public K getOldest() {
return get(0);
}
}

There is no existing implementation in the Java Language and Runtime. All Queues extend AbstractQueue, and its doc clearly states that adding an element to a full queue always ends with an exception. It would be best ( and quite simple ) to wrap a Queue into a class of your own for having the functionality you need.
Once again, because all queues are children of AbstractQueue, simply use that as your internal data type and you should have a flexible implementation running in virtually no time :-)
UPDATE:
As outlined below, there are two open implementations available (this answer is quite old, folks!), see this answer for details.

This is what I did with Queue wrapped with LinkedList, It is fixed sized which I give in here is 2;
public static Queue<String> pageQueue;
pageQueue = new LinkedList<String>(){
private static final long serialVersionUID = -6707803882461262867L;
public boolean add(String object) {
boolean result;
if(this.size() < 2)
result = super.add(object);
else
{
super.removeFirst();
result = super.add(object);
}
return result;
}
};
....
TMarket.pageQueue.add("ScreenOne");
....
TMarket.pageQueue.add("ScreenTwo");
.....

public class CircularQueue<E> extends LinkedList<E> {
private final int capacity;
public CircularQueue(int capacity){
this.capacity = capacity;
}
#Override
public boolean add(E e) {
if(size() >= capacity)
removeFirst();
return super.add(e);
}
}
Usage and test result:
public static void main(String[] args) {
CircularQueue<String> queue = new CircularQueue<>(3);
queue.add("a");
queue.add("b");
queue.add("c");
System.out.println(queue.toString()); //[a, b, c]
String first = queue.pollFirst(); //a
System.out.println(queue.toString()); //[b,c]
queue.add("d");
queue.add("e");
queue.add("f");
System.out.println(queue.toString()); //[d, e, f]
}

I think what you're describing is a circular queue. Here is an example and here is a better one

This class does the job using composition instead of inheritance (other answers here) which removes the possibility of certain side-effects (as covered by Josh Bloch in Essential Java). Trimming of the underlying LinkedList occurs on the methods add,addAll and offer.
import java.util.Collection;
import java.util.Iterator;
import java.util.LinkedList;
import java.util.Queue;
public class LimitedQueue<T> implements Queue<T>, Iterable<T> {
private final int limit;
private final LinkedList<T> list = new LinkedList<T>();
public LimitedQueue(int limit) {
this.limit = limit;
}
private boolean trim() {
boolean changed = list.size() > limit;
while (list.size() > limit) {
list.remove();
}
return changed;
}
#Override
public boolean add(T o) {
boolean changed = list.add(o);
boolean trimmed = trim();
return changed || trimmed;
}
#Override
public int size() {
return list.size();
}
#Override
public boolean isEmpty() {
return list.isEmpty();
}
#Override
public boolean contains(Object o) {
return list.contains(o);
}
#Override
public Iterator<T> iterator() {
return list.iterator();
}
#Override
public Object[] toArray() {
return list.toArray();
}
#Override
public <T> T[] toArray(T[] a) {
return list.toArray(a);
}
#Override
public boolean remove(Object o) {
return list.remove(o);
}
#Override
public boolean containsAll(Collection<?> c) {
return list.containsAll(c);
}
#Override
public boolean addAll(Collection<? extends T> c) {
boolean changed = list.addAll(c);
boolean trimmed = trim();
return changed || trimmed;
}
#Override
public boolean removeAll(Collection<?> c) {
return list.removeAll(c);
}
#Override
public boolean retainAll(Collection<?> c) {
return list.retainAll(c);
}
#Override
public void clear() {
list.clear();
}
#Override
public boolean offer(T e) {
boolean changed = list.offer(e);
boolean trimmed = trim();
return changed || trimmed;
}
#Override
public T remove() {
return list.remove();
}
#Override
public T poll() {
return list.poll();
}
#Override
public T element() {
return list.element();
}
#Override
public T peek() {
return list.peek();
}
}

Sounds like an ordinary List where the add method contains an extra snippet which truncates the list if it gets too long.
If that is too simple, then you probably need to edit your problem description.

Also see this SO question, or ArrayBlockingQueue (be careful about blocking, this might be unwanted in your case).

It is not quite clear what requirements you have that led you to ask this question. If you need a fixed size data structure, you might also want to look at different caching policies. However, since you have a queue, my best guess is that you're looking for some type of router functionality. In that case, I would go with a ring buffer: an array that has a first and last index. Whenever an element is added, you just increment the last element index, and when an element is removed, increment the first element index. In both cases, addition is performed modulo the array size, and make sure to increment the other index when needed, that is, when the queue is full or empty.
Also, if it is a router-type application, you might also want to experiment with an algorithm such as Random Early Dropping (RED), which drops elements from the queue randomly even before it gets filled up. In some cases, RED has been found to have better overall performance than the simple method of allowing the queue to fill up before dropping.

Actually you can write your own impl based on LinkedList, it is quite straight forward, just override the add method and do the staff.

I think the best matching answer is from this other question.
Apache commons collections 4 has a CircularFifoQueue which is what you are looking for. Quoting the javadoc:
CircularFifoQueue is a first-in first-out queue with a fixed size that replaces its oldest element if full.

A Simple solution, below is a Queue of "String"
LinkedHashMap<Integer, String> queue;
int queueKeysCounter;
queue.put(queueKeysCounter++, "My String");
queueKeysCounter %= QUEUE_SIZE;
Note that this will not maintain the Order of the items in the Queue, but it will replace the oldest entry.

As it's advised in OOPs that we should prefer Composition over Inheritance
Here my solution keeping that in mind.
package com.choiceview;
import java.util.ArrayDeque;
class Ideone {
public static void main(String[] args) {
LimitedArrayDeque<Integer> q = new LimitedArrayDeque<>(3);
q.add(1);
q.add(2);
q.add(3);
System.out.println(q);
q.add(4);
// First entry ie 1 got pushed out
System.out.println(q);
}
}
class LimitedArrayDeque<T> {
private int maxSize;
private ArrayDeque<T> queue;
private LimitedArrayDeque() {
}
public LimitedArrayDeque(int maxSize) {
this.maxSize = maxSize;
queue = new ArrayDeque<T>(maxSize);
}
public void add(T t) {
if (queue.size() == maxSize) {
queue.removeFirst();
}
queue.add(t);
}
public boolean remove(T t) {
return queue.remove(t);
}
public boolean contains(T t) {
return queue.contains(t);
}
#Override
public String toString() {
return queue.toString();
}
}

Ok, I'll throw out my version too. :-) This is build to be very performant - for when that matters. It's not based on LinkedList - and is thread safe (should be at least). FIFO
static class FixedSizeCircularReference<T> {
T[] entries
FixedSizeCircularReference(int size) {
this.entries = new Object[size] as T[]
this.size = size
}
int cur = 0
int size
synchronized void add(T entry) {
entries[cur++] = entry
if (cur >= size) {
cur = 0
}
}
List<T> asList() {
int c = cur
int s = size
T[] e = entries.collect() as T[]
List<T> list = new ArrayList<>()
int oldest = (c == s - 1) ? 0 : c
for (int i = 0; i < e.length; i++) {
def entry = e[oldest + i < s ? oldest + i : oldest + i - s]
if (entry) list.add(entry)
}
return list
}
}