collections: why duplicates arent getting eradicated?

[maggie joseph]

package Renewal;
import java.util.*;

public class Collection1 implements Comparable<Collection1> 
{
	Integer c;
	Collection1(int x){
		this.c=x;
	}
	public boolean equals(Object o){
		if(!(o instanceof Collection1)||(o!=null))
			return false;
		else {
			Collection1 col=(Collection1)o;
			if (col.c==null && c==null)
				return true;
			else if (col.c!=null && col!=null)
				return col.c.equals(c);
			else return false;
	}
		}
	public int hashCode(){
		if (c==null)
			return 0;
		else
			return c.hashCode();
	}
	public static void main(String[] args){
		List<Collection1> list=new ArrayList<Collection1>();
		list.add(new Collection1(78));
		list.add(new Collection1(67));
		list.add(new Collection1(67));
		list.add(new Collection1(56));
		list.add(new Collection1(78));
		
		Collections.sort(list);
		for (Collection1 col:list)
	System.out.println("list"+col.c);	
}
	public int compareTo(Collection1 arg0) {
		return (c.compareTo(arg0.c));
	}
	}
output is
list56
list67
list67
list78
list78

[Christophe Verré]

Please use your post to ask questions, not the title only.

why duplicates arent getting eradicated???

ArrayList allows you to add duplicates. Use a Set instead.

[maggie joseph]

then whats the use of comparable???

[Christophe Verré]

maggie joseph wrote:then whats the use of comparable???

Sorting.

[maggie joseph]

thanks.....

[Andrew Monkhouse]

Perhaps you need to rethink what your application is doing, and what you want it to do.

As Christophe mentions, the Comparable interface allows you to define how you want your objects to be compared, which is usually used when sorting instances of your objects. Your class implements Comparable with the following method:

	public int compareTo(Collection1 arg0) {
		return (c.compareTo(arg0.c));
	}

This basically states that whenever you are comparing two instances of Collection1, you are only interested in what the value is within the c instance variable. Since c is an Integer, and the Integer class implements the Comparable interface, your ArrayList will be sorted according to the natural sort order of Integers.

(A side effect of your using the Integer compareTo method is that you do not really need to override the equals or the hashCode methods. Which is just as well, as there is a bug in your equals method where o can only be null at line 14).

[maggie joseph]

hey does it mean that i should implement comparator or comparable only while using TreeSets and TreeMaps???

[Christophe Verré]

maggie joseph wrote:hey does it mean that i should implement comparator or comparable only while using TreeSets and TreeMaps???

No. You can use it with Collections#sort, to sort an Collection class, like an ArrayList.

[Andrew Monkhouse]

Not necessarily. You can use it anytime you have objects that you want to compare that you want to specify how the comparison works.

You used the example above of having various Collection1 objects inserted into a List, and having them sort by the numerical value of the internal variable 'c' - a perfectly reasonable usage.

In exactly the same way, you might want to have a class that contains a person's name and country (extremely simplified example):

class Person {
    private String firstName;
    private String lastName;
    private String country;
    // ...
}

In such a case, you might want to have sort order determined by lastName then firstName, except when the country entered is one of the countries that has family name first. This could give me a sorted list such as:

Last, First, Country

Abrahams, John, England

Shen, Fox, China

Johanson, Donald, USA

As you can see, I want Mr Fox from China sorted between Mr Abrahams from England and Mr Johanson from USA, even though a "standard" sort based on the name in the "first-name" field does not work.

Another example might be when you want to compare currencies. Which is the greater sum: $ 0.50 USD, or ¥ 30 JPY ? If you must keep the original currency, then you probably want to have a specialized comparator behind the scenes to handle the comparison since you cannot just compare the numbers directly.

[Andrew Monkhouse]

And Christophe has once again posted something that says succinctly what took me considerably longer to say.

[Christophe Verré]

Andrew Monkhouse wrote:And Christophe has once again posted something that says succinctly what took me considerably longer to say.

You can call this a lack of professionalism, or plain laziness