I have some code like this:
@SuppressWarnings({"unchecked", "rawtypes"})
List<String> theList = new ArrayList();
Is this type-safe? I think it is safe because I don't assign the raw type to anything else. I can even demonstrate that it performs type checking when I call add
:
theList.add(601); // compilation error
I have read "What is a raw type and why shouldn't we use it?" but I don't think it applies here because I only create the list with a raw type. After that, I assign it to a parameterized type, so what could go wrong?
Also, what about this?
@SuppressWarnings({"unchecked", "rawtypes"})
List<String> anotherList = new ArrayList(theList);
The first is type-safe because the list is empty, but still not advised. There's no benefit in using a raw type here. Better to design away from a warning than suppress it.
The second is definitely not type-safe, as theList
may be a List<Integer>
for example:
import java.util.*;
public class Test {
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
List<Integer> integers = new ArrayList<>();
integers.add(0);
List<String> strings = new ArrayList(integers);
// Bang!
String x = strings.get(0);
}
}
Note how the constructor itself is called without an exception - there's no way for it to know what kind of list you're really trying to construct, so it doesn't perform any casts. However, when you then fetch a value, that implicitly casts to String
and you get a ClassCastException
.
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