I was wondering if there is a way in Java to do something like
Class c = List<String>.class;
Class c2 = List<Date>.class;
I need something like this to create a map that stores the class name (with generic type) and the corresponding object which I can later lookup. For example,
Map<Class, Object> dataMap = new HashMap<Class, Object>();
dataMap.put(c, listOfStrings);
dataMap.put(c2, listOfDates);
Is this not possible because of type erasure during runtime ?
A Generic class simply means that the items or functions in that class can be generalized with the parameter(example T) to specify that we can add any type as a parameter in place of T like Integer, Character, String, Double or any other user-defined type.
A generic class can be a base class to other generic or non-generic classes or abstract classes. A generic class can be derived from other generic or non-generic interfaces, classes, or abstract classes.
The Java compiler won't let you cast a generic type across its type parameters because the target type, in general, is neither a subtype nor a supertype.
You can't to it quite like this, but you can achieve your overall aim using the same approach as Guice does with TypeLiteral
. If you're using Guice already, I suggest you use that directly - otherwise, you might want to create your own similar class.
Essentially the idea is that subclasses of a generic type which specify type arguments directly retain that information. So you write something like:
TypeLiteral literal = new TypeLiteral<List<String>>() {};
Then you can use literal.getClass().getGenericSuperclass()
and get the type arguments from that. TypeLiteral
itself doesn't need to have any interesting code (I don't know whether it does have anything in Guice, for other reasons).
No, it is not possible. You can't even refer to List<String>.class
in your code - it results in a compilation error. There is only one single class object for List
, and it is called List.class
.
Is this not possible because of type erasure during runtime ?
Correct.
Btw this is a generic type, not an annotated type.
On second thought, you can have something fairly close to your Map above, by tweaking Josh Bloch's typesafe heterogenous container (published in Effective Java 2nd Ed., Item 29) a bit:
public class Lists {
private Map<Class<?>, List<?>> lists =
new HashMap<Class<?>, List<?>>();
public <T> void putList(Class<T> type, List<T> list) {
if (type == null)
throw new NullPointerException("Type is null");
lists.put(type, list);
}
public <T> List<T> getList(Class<T> type) {
return (List<T>)lists.get(type);
}
}
The cast in getList
is unchecked, giving a warning, but I am afraid we can't avoid that. However, we know that the value stored for class X
must be a List<X>
, as this is guaranteed by the compiler. So I think the cast is safe (if you play by the rules, that is - i.e. never call putList
with a plain nongeneric Class
parameter), thus it can be suppressed using @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
.
And you can use it like this:
Lists lists = new Lists();
List<Integer> integerList = new ArrayList<Integer>();
List<String> stringList = new ArrayList<String>();
...
lists.putList(Integer.class, integerList);
lists.putList(String.class, stringList);
List<Integer> storedList = lists.getList(Integer.class);
assertTrue(storedList == integerList);
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With