DOCSLIB.ORG

Maurice Naftalin, Philip Wadler — «Java Generics and Collections

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Java Generics and Collections Maurice Naftalin and Philip Wadler Beijing • Cambridge • Farnham • Köln • Sebastopol • Taipei • Tokyo Java Generics and Collections by Maurice Naftalin and Philip Wadler Copyright © 2007 O’Reilly Media . All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Published by O’Reilly Media, Inc., 1005 Gravenstein Highway North, Sebastopol, CA 95472. O’Reilly books may be purchased for educational, business, or sales promotional use. Online editions are also available for most titles (http://safari.oreilly.com). For more information, contact our corporate/ institutional sales department: (800) 998-9938 or [email protected]. Editor: Mike Loukides Indexers: Maurice Naftalin and Philip Wadler Production Services: Windfall Software Cover Designer: Karen Montgomery Printing History: October 2006: First Edition. Nutshell Handbook, the Nutshell Handbook logo, and the O’Reilly logo are registered trademarks of O’Reilly Media, Inc. Java Generics and Collections, the image of an alligator, and related trade dress are trademarks of O’Reilly Media, Inc. Many of the designations used by manufacturers and sellers to distinguish their products are claimed as trademarks. Where those designations appear in this book, and O’Reilly Media, Inc. was aware of a trademark claim, the designations have been printed in caps or initial caps. While every precaution has been taken in the preparation of this book, the publisher and authors assume no responsibility for errors or omissions, or for damages resulting from the use of the information con- tained herein. TM This book uses RepKover™, a durable and flexible lay-flat binding. ISBN: 978-0-596-52775-4 [M] [2/09] 1233352047 We dedicate this book to Joyce Naftalin, Lionel Naftalin, Adam Wadler, and Leora Wadler —Maurice Naftalin and Philip Wadler Table of Contents Preface . xi Part I. Generics 1. Introduction . 3 1.1 Generics 4 1.2 Boxing and Unboxing 6 1.3 Foreach 9 1.4 Generic Methods and Varargs 10 1.5 Assertions 12 2. Subtyping and Wildcards . 15 2.1 Subtyping and the Substitution Principle 15 2.2 Wildcards with extends 17 2.3 Wildcards with super 18 2.4 The Get and Put Principle 19 2.5 Arrays 22 2.6 Wildcards Versus Type Parameters 25 2.7 Wildcard Capture 27 2.8 Restrictions on Wildcards 28 3. Comparison and Bounds . 31 3.1 Comparable 31 3.2 Maximum of a Collection 34 3.3 A Fruity Example 36 3.4 Comparator 37 3.5 Enumerated Types 42 3.6 Multiple Bounds 45 3.7 Bridges 47 3.8 Covariant Overriding 49 v 4. Declarations . 51 4.1 Constructors 51 4.2 Static Members 52 4.3 Nested Classes 53 4.4 How Erasure Works 55 5. Evolution, Not Revolution . 59 5.1 Legacy Library with Legacy Client 60 5.2 Generic Library with Generic Client 60 5.3 Generic Library with Legacy Client 62 5.4 Legacy Library with Generic Client 65 5.4.1 Evolving a Library using Minimal Changes 65 5.4.2 Evolving a Library using Stubs 68 5.4.3 Evolving a Library using Wrappers 68 5.5 Conclusions 71 6. Reification . 73 6.1 Reifiable Types 73 6.2 Instance Tests and Casts 74 6.3 Exception Handling 79 6.4 Array Creation 80 6.5 The Principle of Truth in Advertising 82 6.6 The Principle of Indecent Exposure 86 6.7 How to Define ArrayList 89 6.8 Array Creation and Varargs 90 6.9 Arrays as a Deprecated Type? 92 6.10 Summing Up 95 7. Reflection . 97 7.1 Generics for Reflection 97 7.2 Reflected Types are Reifiable Types 100 7.3 Reflection for Primitive Types 101 7.4 A Generic Reflection Library 101 7.5 Reflection for Generics 104 7.6 Reflecting Generic Types 105 8. Effective Generics . 109 8.1 Take Care when Calling Legacy Code 109 8.2 Use Checked Collections to Enforce Security 111 8.3 Specialize to Create Reifiable Types 112 8.4 Maintain Binary Compatibility 117 vi | Table of Contents 9. Design Patterns . 123 9.1 Visitor 123 9.2 Interpreter 127 9.3 Function 128 9.4 Strategy 131 9.5 Subject-Observer 136 Part II. Collections 10. The Main Interfaces of the Java Collections Framework . 145 11. Preliminaries . 147 11.1 Iterable and Iterators 147 11.2 Implementations 149 11.3 Efficiency and the O-Notation 150 11.4 Contracts 152 11.5 Collections and Thread Safety 153 11.5.1 Synchronization and the Legacy Collections 155 11.5.2 JDK 1.2: Synchronized Collections and Fail-Fast Iterators 156 11.5.3 Concurrent Collections: Java 5 and Beyond 158 12. The Collection Interface . 161 12.1 Using the Methods of Collection 164 12.2 Implementing Collection 169 12.3 Collection Constructors 169 13. Sets . 171 13.1 Implementing Set 171 13.1.1 HashSet 172 13.1.2 LinkedHashSet 174 13.1.3 CopyOnWriteArraySet 175 13.1.4 EnumSet 176 13.2 SortedSet and NavigableSet 178 13.2.1 NavigableSet 181 13.2.2 TreeSet 184 13.2.3 ConcurrentSkipListSet 186 13.3 Comparing Set Implementations 188 14. Queues . 191 14.1 Using the Methods of Queue 193 14.2 Implementing Queue 195 14.2.1 PriorityQueue 195 Table of Contents | vii 14.2.2 ConcurrentLinkedQueue 197 14.3 BlockingQueue 198 14.3.1 Using the Methods of BlockingQueue 199 14.3.2 Implementing BlockingQueue 202 14.4 Deque 206 14.4.1 Implementing Deque 208 14.4.2 BlockingDeque 209 14.5 Comparing Queue Implementations 210 15. Lists . 213 15.1 Using the Methods of List 215 15.2 Implementing List 218 15.2.1 ArrayList 218 15.2.2 LinkedList 221 15.2.3 CopyOnWriteArrayList 221 15.3 Comparing List Implementations 221 16. Maps . 223 16.1 Using the Methods of Map 225 16.2 Implementing Map 226 16.2.1 HashMap 227 16.2.2 LinkedHashMap 227 16.2.3 WeakHashMap 229 16.2.4 IdentityHashMap 231 16.2.5 EnumMap 233 16.3 SortedMap and NavigableMap 234 16.3.1 NavigableMap 235 16.3.2 TreeMap 236 16.4 ConcurrentMap 237 16.4.1 ConcurrentHashMap 238 16.5 ConcurrentNavigableMap 238 16.5.1 ConcurrentSkipListMap 239 16.6 Comparing Map Implementations 239 17. The Collections Class . 241 17.1 Generic Algorithms 241 17.1.1 Changing the Order of List Elements 241 17.1.2 Changing the Contents of a List 242 17.1.3 Finding Extreme Values in a Collection 243 17.1.4 Finding Specific Values in a List 243 17.2 Collection Factories 244 17.3 Wrappers 245 17.3.1 Synchronized Collections 245 viii | Table of Contents 17.3.2 Unmodifiable Collections 246 17.3.3 Checked Collections 246 17.4 Other Methods 247 Index . 251 Table of Contents | ix Preface Java now supports generics, the most significant change to the language since the ad- dition of inner classes in Java 1.2—some would say the most significant change to the language ever. Say you wish to process lists. Some may be lists of integers, others lists of strings, and yet others lists of lists of strings. In Java before generics this is simple. You can represent all three by the same class, called List, which has elements of class Object: list of integers List list of strings List list of lists of strings List In order to keep the language simple, you are forced to do some of the work yourself: you must keep track of the fact that you have a list of integers (or strings or lists of strings), and when you extract an element from the list you must cast it from Object back to Integer (or String or List). For instance, the Collections Framework before generics made extensive use of this idiom. Einstein is reputed to have said, “Everything should be as simple as possible but no simpler”. And some might say the approach above is too simple. In Java with generics you may distinguish different types of lists: list of integers List<Integer> list of strings List<String> list of lists of strings List<List<String>> Now the compiler keeps track of whether you have a list of integers (or strings or lists of strings), and no explicit cast back to Integer (or String or List<String>) is required. In some ways, this is similar to generics in Ada or templates in C++, but the actual inspiration is parametric polymorphism as found in functional languages such as ML and Haskell. Part I of this book provides a thorough introduction to generics. We discuss the inter- actions between generics and subtyping, and how to use wildcards and bounds; we xi describe techniques for evolving your code; we explain subtleties connected with casts and arrays; we treat advanced topics such as the interaction between generics and se- curity, and how to maintain binary compatibility; and we update common design pat- terns to exploit generics. Much has been written on generics, and their introduction into Java has sparked some controversy. Certainly, the design of generics involves swings and roundabouts: making it easy to evolve code requires that objects not reify run-time information describing generic type parameters, but the absence of this information introduces corner cases into operations such as casting and array creation.We present a balanced treatment of generics, explaining how to exploit their strengths and work around their weaknesses. Part II provides a comprehensive introduction to the Collections Framework. Newton is reputed to have said, “If I have seen farther than others, it is because I stand on the shoulders of giants”. The best programmers live by this motto, building on existing frameworks and reusable code wherever appropriate.
Recommended publications
  • G22.2110-003 Programming Languages - Fall 2012 Week 14 - Part 1

    G22.2110-003 Programming Languages - Fall 2012 Week 14 - Part 1

    G22.2110-003 Programming Languages - Fall 2012 Week 14 - Part 1 Thomas Wies New York University Review Last lecture I Exceptions Outline Today: I Generic Programming Sources for today's lecture: I PLP, ch. 8.4 I Programming in Scala, ch. 19, 20.6 Generic programming Subroutines provide a way to abstract over values. Generic programming lets us abstract over types. Examples: I A sorting algorithm has the same structure, regardless of the types being sorted I Stack primitives have the same semantics, regardless of the objects stored on the stack. One common use: I algorithms on containers: updating, iteration, search Language models: I C: macros (textual substitution) or unsafe casts I Ada: generic units and instantiations I C++, Java, C#, Scala: generics (also called templates) I ML: parametric polymorphism, functors Parameterizing software components Construct Parameter(s): array bounds, element type subprogram values (arguments) Ada generic package values, types, packages Ada generic subprogram values, types C++ class template values, types C++ function template values, types Java generic classes Scala generic types (and implicit values) ML function values (including other functions) ML type constructor types ML functor values, types, structures Templates in C++ template <typename T> class Array { public : explicit Array (size_t); // constructor T& operator[] (size_t); // subscript operator ... // other operations private : ... // a size and a pointer to an array }; Array<int> V1(100); // instantiation Array<int> V2; // use default constructor
  • Advanced-Java.Pdf

    Advanced-Java.Pdf

    Advanced java i Advanced java Advanced java ii Contents 1 How to create and destroy objects 1 1.1 Introduction......................................................1 1.2 Instance Construction.................................................1 1.2.1 Implicit (Generated) Constructor.......................................1 1.2.2 Constructors without Arguments.......................................1 1.2.3 Constructors with Arguments........................................2 1.2.4 Initialization Blocks.............................................2 1.2.5 Construction guarantee............................................3 1.2.6 Visibility...................................................4 1.2.7 Garbage collection..............................................4 1.2.8 Finalizers...................................................5 1.3 Static initialization..................................................5 1.4 Construction Patterns.................................................5 1.4.1 Singleton...................................................6 1.4.2 Utility/Helper Class.............................................7 1.4.3 Factory....................................................7 1.4.4 Dependency Injection............................................8 1.5 Download the Source Code..............................................9 1.6 What’s next......................................................9 2 Using methods common to all objects 10 2.1 Introduction...................................................... 10 2.2 Methods equals and hashCode...........................................
  • Java Generics Adoption: How New Features Are Introduced, Championed, Or Ignored

    Java Generics Adoption: How New Features Are Introduced, Championed, Or Ignored

    Java Generics Adoption: How New Features are Introduced, Championed, or Ignored Chris Parnin Christian Bird Emerson Murphy-Hill College of Computing Microsoft Research Dept. of Computer Science Georgia Institute of Redmond, Washington North Carolina State Technology [email protected] University Atlanta, Georgia Raleigh, North Carolina [email protected] [email protected] Far too often, greatly heralded claims and visions of new language features fail to hold or persist in practice. Discus- ABSTRACT sions of the costs and benefits of language features can easily devolve into a religious war with both sides armed with little Support for generic programming was added to the Java more than anecdotes [13]. Empirical evidence about the language in 2004, representing perhaps the most significant adoption and use of past language features should inform change to one of the most widely used programming lan- and encourage a more rational discussion when designing guages today. Researchers and language designers antici- language features and considering how they should be de- pated this addition would relieve many long-standing prob- ployed. Collecting this evidence is not just sensible but a lems plaguing developers, but surprisingly, no one has yet responsibility of our community. measured whether generics actually provide such relief. In In this paper, we examine the adoption and use of generics, this paper, we report on the first empirical investigation into which were introduced into the Java language in 2004. When how Java generics have been integrated into open source Sun introduced generics, they claimed that the language software by automatically mining the history of 20 popular feature was \a long-awaited enhancement to the type system" open source Java programs, traversing more than 500 million that \eliminates the drudgery of casting." Sun recommended lines of code in the process.
  • Addressing Common Crosscutting Problems with Arcum∗

    Addressing Common Crosscutting Problems with Arcum∗

    Addressing Common Crosscutting Problems with Arcum∗ Macneil Shonle William G. Griswold Sorin Lerner Computer Science & Engineering, UC San Diego La Jolla, CA 92093-0404 {mshonle, wgg, lerner}@cs.ucsd.edu ABSTRACT 1. INTRODUCTION Crosscutting is an inherent part of software development and can Arcum is a framework for declaring and performing user-defined typically be managed through modularization: A module’s stable program checks and transformations, with the goal of increasing properties are defined in an interface while its likely-to-change automated refactoring opportunities for the user [21]. By using Ar- properties are encapsulated within the module [19]. The cross- cum, a programmer can view the implementation of a crosscutting cutting of the stable properties, such as class and method names, design idiom as a form of module. Arcum uses a declarative lan- can be mitigated with automated refactoring tools that allow, for guage to describe the idiom’s implementation, where descriptions example, the interface’s elements to be renamed [9, 18]. However, are composed of Arcum interface and Arcum option constructs. An often the crosscutting from design idioms (such as design patterns option describes one possible implementation of a crosscutting de- and coding styles) are so specific to the program’s domain that sign idiom, and a set of options are related to each other when they their crosscutting would not likely have been anticipated by the all implement the same Arcum interface. developers of an automated refactoring system. Arcum’s declarative language uses a Java-like syntax for first- The Arcum plug-in for Eclipse enables programmers to describe order logic predicate statements, including a special pattern nota- the implementation of a crosscutting design idiom as a set of syn- tion for expressing Java code.
  • REVERSE GENERICS Parametrization After the Fact

    REVERSE GENERICS Parametrization After the Fact

    REVERSE GENERICS Parametrization after the Fact Alexandre Bergel PLEIAD Laboratory, Computer Science Department (DCC), University of Chile, Santiago, Chile Lorenzo Bettini Dipartimento di Informatica, Universit`adi Torino, Italy Keywords: Generic programming, Java generics, C++ templates. Abstract: By abstracting over types, generic programming enables one to write code that is independent from specific data type implementation. This style is supported by most mainstream languages, including C++ with tem- plates and Java with generics. If some code is not designed in a generic way from the start, a major effort is required to convert this code to use generic types. This conversion is manually realized which is known to be tedious and error-prone. We propose Reverse Generics, a general linguistic mechanism to define a generic class from a non-generic class. For a given set of types, a generic is formed by unbinding static dependencies contained in these types. This generalization and generic type instantiation may be done incrementally. This paper studies the possible application of this linguistic mechanism to C++ and Java and, in particular, it reviews limitations of Java generics against our proposal. 1 INTRODUCTION more than 100 down-casts and up-casts and 70 uses of instanceof. This examination reveals that in many The concept of generic programming (Dos Reis and places the amount of up-casting subsequent down- J¨arvi, 2005), which has characterized functional pro- casting that is used almost makes the programs be- gramming for several decades, appeared in main- have like dynamically typed code. stream programming object-oriented languages such Note, that the need to make existing code generic as C++, only in the late 80s, where it motivated from may arise also in languages where generic types were the beginning the design of the Standard Template Li- already available.
  • C DEFINES and C++ TEMPLATES Professor Ken Birman

    C DEFINES and C++ TEMPLATES Professor Ken Birman

    Professor Ken Birman C DEFINES AND C++ TEMPLATES CS4414 Lecture 10 CORNELL CS4414 - FALL 2020. 1 COMPILE TIME “COMPUTING” In lecture 9 we learned about const, constexpr and saw that C++ really depends heavily on these Ken’s solution to homework 2 runs about 10% faster with extensive use of these annotations Constexpr underlies the “auto” keyword and can sometimes eliminate entire functions by precomputing their results at compile time. Parallel C++ code would look ugly without normal code structuring. Const and constexpr allow the compiler to see “beyond” that and recognize parallelizable code paths. CORNELL CS4414 - FALL 2020. 2 … BUT HOW FAR CAN WE TAKE THIS IDEA? Today we will look at the concept of programming the compiler using the templating layer of C++ We will see that it is a powerful tool! There are also programmable aspects of Linux, and of the modern hardware we use. By controlling the whole system, we gain speed and predictability while writing elegant, clean code. CORNELL CS4414 - FALL 2020. 3 IDEA MAP FOR TODAY History of generics: #define in C Templates are easy to create, if you stick to basics The big benefit compared to Java is that a template We have seen a number of parameterized is a compile-time construct, whereas in Java a generic types in C++, like std::vector and std::map is a run-time construct. The template language is Turing-complete, but computes These are examples of “templates”. only on types, not data from the program (even when They are like generics in Java constants are provided).
  • Java (Software Platform) from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia Not to Be Confused with Javascript

    Java (Software Platform) from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia Not to Be Confused with Javascript

    Java (software platform) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Not to be confused with JavaScript. This article may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone , or spelling. You can assist by editing it. (February 2016) Java (software platform) Dukesource125.gif The Java technology logo Original author(s) James Gosling, Sun Microsystems Developer(s) Oracle Corporation Initial release 23 January 1996; 20 years ago[1][2] Stable release 8 Update 73 (1.8.0_73) (February 5, 2016; 34 days ago) [±][3] Preview release 9 Build b90 (November 2, 2015; 4 months ago) [±][4] Written in Java, C++[5] Operating system Windows, Solaris, Linux, OS X[6] Platform Cross-platform Available in 30+ languages List of languages [show] Type Software platform License Freeware, mostly open-source,[8] with a few proprietary[9] compo nents[10] Website www.java.com Java is a set of computer software and specifications developed by Sun Microsyst ems, later acquired by Oracle Corporation, that provides a system for developing application software and deploying it in a cross-platform computing environment . Java is used in a wide variety of computing platforms from embedded devices an d mobile phones to enterprise servers and supercomputers. While less common, Jav a applets run in secure, sandboxed environments to provide many features of nati ve applications and can be embedded in HTML pages. Writing in the Java programming language is the primary way to produce code that will be deployed as byte code in a Java Virtual Machine (JVM); byte code compil ers are also available for other languages, including Ada, JavaScript, Python, a nd Ruby.
  • Programming-In-Scala.Pdf

    Programming-In-Scala.Pdf

    Cover · Overview · Contents · Discuss · Suggest · Glossary · Index Programming in Scala Cover · Overview · Contents · Discuss · Suggest · Glossary · Index Programming in Scala Martin Odersky, Lex Spoon, Bill Venners artima ARTIMA PRESS MOUNTAIN VIEW,CALIFORNIA Cover · Overview · Contents · Discuss · Suggest · Glossary · Index iv Programming in Scala First Edition, Version 6 Martin Odersky is the creator of the Scala language and a professor at EPFL in Lausanne, Switzerland. Lex Spoon worked on Scala for two years as a post-doc with Martin Odersky. Bill Venners is president of Artima, Inc. Artima Press is an imprint of Artima, Inc. P.O. Box 390122, Mountain View, California 94039 Copyright © 2007, 2008 Martin Odersky, Lex Spoon, and Bill Venners. All rights reserved. First edition published as PrePrint™ eBook 2007 First edition published 2008 Produced in the United States of America 12 11 10 09 08 5 6 7 8 9 ISBN-10: 0-9815316-1-X ISBN-13: 978-0-9815316-1-8 No part of this publication may be reproduced, modified, distributed, stored in a retrieval system, republished, displayed, or performed, for commercial or noncommercial purposes or for compensation of any kind without prior written permission from Artima, Inc. All information and materials in this book are provided "as is" and without warranty of any kind. The term “Artima” and the Artima logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Artima, Inc. All other company and/or product names may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their owners. Cover · Overview · Contents · Discuss · Suggest · Glossary · Index to Nastaran - M.O. to Fay - L.S. to Siew - B.V.
  • Harmonizing Classes, Functions, Tuples, and Type Parameters in Virgil III

    Harmonizing Classes, Functions, Tuples, and Type Parameters in Virgil III

    Harmonizing Classes, Functions, Tuples, and Type Parameters in Virgil III Ben L. Titzer Google [email protected] Abstract guages like Java first offered object-oriented emulation of func- Languages are becoming increasingly multi-paradigm. Subtype tions in the form of single-method interfaces like Runnable and polymorphism in statically-typed object-oriented languages is be- Comparator. Generics gave rise to even more complex emula- ing supplemented with parametric polymorphism in the form of tions of functions such as java.util.concurrent’s Callable generics. Features like first-class functions and lambdas are ap- and Guava’s Function [13] and Predicate. Now Java has pro- pearing everywhere. Yet existing languages like Java, C#, C++, posals for syntax for function types and closures in JSR 335 [17]. D, and Scala seem to accrete ever more complexity when they Similar developments occurred in both C++ and C#, with libraries reach beyond their original paradigm into another; inevitably older first evolving functional patterns before languages added syntactic features have some rough edges that lead to nonuniformity and pit- support. C# first allowed delegates, which are closures bound to a falls. Given a fresh start, a new language designer is faced with a method of an object, and then full lambdas. Scala set out to blend daunting array of potential features. Where to start? What is impor- object-oriented and functional styles while still primarily targeting tant to get right first, and what can be added later? What features the JVM. Not to be outdone, C++11 has added support for lambdas must work together, and what features are orthogonal? We report and a host of other new features.
  • Advances in Programming Languages: Generics, Interoperability and Implementation

    Advances in Programming Languages: Generics, Interoperability and Implementation

    Advances in Programming Languages: Generics, interoperability and implementation Stephen Gilmore The University of Edinburgh February 1, 2007 Understanding generic code Generic Java extends Java with generic type variables which allow us to define generic classes and generic methods. Generic C# extends C# similarly. When adding genericity to an object- oriented programming language it is important to do this in a way which does not invalidate existing code. Legacy code (which does not use the generic features of the language) should continue to operate as before and there should be a smooth upgrade path from legacy code to generic code. In Generic Java (Java 1.5) generics are compiled out by the Java compiler. Type variables are replaced by Object and downcasts are inserted automatically by the compiler instead of being coded manually by the programmer. The implications of this are that generic code is never slower than non-generic code (but there is no reason to think that it will be faster) while being more reliable than non-generic code. The way-ahead-of-time optimising compiler gcj will be extended to deal with Java generics when GCC-4.3 is released. The gcj compiler will include the Eclipse Compiler for Java, ecj as its front-end. This extended gcj could produce faster code by eliminating casts. This example shows use of SUN’s javac. /* File: programs/java/Cell.java */ /* A generic, updateable cell */ class Cell<A> { A value; Cell(A value) { this.value = value; } A get() { return value; } void set (A value) { this.value = value; } } The above example is a simple generic cell which holds values.
  • Orthogonal Persistence in Java Supported by Aspect- Oriented Programming and Reflection

    Orthogonal Persistence in Java Supported by Aspect- Oriented Programming and Reflection

    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Repositório Científico do Instituto Politécnico do Porto Orthogonal Persistence in Java supported by Aspect- Oriented Programming and Reflection Rui Humbero R. Pereira J.Baltasar García Perez-Schofield Instituto Superior Contabilidade e Administração do Porto Departamento de Informática ISCAP/IPP Universidad de Vigo Porto, Portugal Vigo, España [email protected] [email protected] Abstract — The persistence concern implemented as an aspect the database. It was designed to be totally reusable without the has been studied since the appearance of the Aspect-Oriented need of any kind of adaption on the code. The following code paradigm. Frequently, persistence is given as an example that fragment shows the way an application can interact with data can be aspectized, but until today no real world solution has objects. applied that paradigm. Such solution should be able to enhance the programmer productivity and make the application less CPersistentRoot psRoot; prone to errors. To test the viability of that concept, in a previous Student student; study we developed a prototype that implements Orthogonal Student student2; Persistence as an aspect. This first version of the prototype was Course course; already fully functional with all Java types including arrays. In this work the results of our new research to overcome some // get a persistent root (psRoot) limitations that we have identified on the data type abstraction psRoot=new CPersistentRoot(); and transparency in the prototype are presented. One of our goals was to avoid the Java standard idiom for genericity, based //Get one Student object from the psRoot (the on casts, type tests and subtyping.
  • Java Generics: an Order-Theoretic Approach (Detailed Outline)

    Java Generics: an Order-Theoretic Approach (Detailed Outline)

    Java Generics: An Order-Theoretic Approach Moez A. AbdelGawad Informatics Research Institute, SRTA-City, Alexandria, Egypt [email protected] Abstract Introduction The addition of generic classes, generic interfaces and parameterized types (i.e., in- 1 Generics have been added to Java so as to increase the stantiations of generic classes ) to Java has signifi- expressiveness of its type system. Generics in Java, cantly enhanced the expressiveness of its type sys- however, include some features—such as Java wild- tem [22, 23, 16, 19, 34, 26]. Support for generics cards, F -bounded generics, and Java erasure—that in Java and other mainstream nominally-typed OOP have been hard to analyze and reason about so far, languages similar to it—such as C# [1], Scala [28], reflecting the fact that the mathematical modeling of C++ [2], and Kotlin [3]—has several drawbacks how- generics in Java and other similar nominally-typed ever. object-oriented programming (OOP) languages is a For example, the bounded existentials model of challenge. As a result, the type systems of main- Java wildcards, while accurate, is exceedingly com- stream nominally-typed OOP languages, which are plex [36, 35, 18, 17, 32, 33]. The notion of “capture built based on current models of generics, are overly conversion,” which is based on the bounded existen- complex, which hinders the progress of these type tials model of wildcards, renders the generic type sys- systems. tem of Java fully comprehensible only to the most 2 In this paper we present a detailed outline of a advanced of Java developers . new approach to modeling Java generics that uses Further, support of some features in Java gener- concepts and tools from order theory, and we report ics has a number of irregularities or “rough edges.” on our progress in developing this approach.