Generics were added with Java 5. Before that you had to cast every object you read from a collection. With generics you tell the compiler what types of objects are permitted in collections. Then the compiler tells you when there is a problem.
If a class or interface has type parameters, then it is called a generic class/interface. Generic classes or interfaces can be used as "raw types". This is primarily for backward compatibility. We get a warning message from compiler when we use raw types.
List<Object> can be used but you cannot assign List<String> to this type. They are both subtypes of raw List type.
Set<Integer> set1 = new HashSet<>();
Set<Object> set3 = new HashSet<>();
// compile error.
set1 = set3;
But what if you don't care about the actual type of the collection elements? Lets say you want to have a method with 2 sets as parameter.
We can use Set<?> which means "set of any type".
public static void main(String[] args) {
Set<Integer> set1 = new HashSet<>();
Set<String> set2 = new HashSet<>();
calculate(set1, set2);
Set<?> mySet = new HashSet<>();
// compile error. You cannot do that when the type is uncertain.
// you can do that by using raw types but you get a warning and it is not reccomended!
// this means, wildcard type is useful to assign a reference to another
mySet.add(new Integer(1));
Set myRawSet = new HashSet();
myRawSet.add(new Integer(2));
// legal
mySet = set1;
mySet = set2;
}
private static void calculate(Set<?> set1, Set<?> set2) {
}
Regarding arrays, it is illegal to create an array of a generic type.
In Java, arrays and generics don't mix very well.
Below is an example that illustrates the syntax of generics:
public class Test {
// generic method
public <T> T doSomething(T a, T b) {
return null;
}
// generic method with bounded type
public <T extends Comparable> T doSomething2(T a, T b) {
return null;
}
class MyGenericClass<K> {
public K operation() {
return null;
}
}
private void wildCardUnbounded() {
MyGenericClass<?> variable = new MyGenericClass<>();
MyGenericClass<Integer> variable2 = new MyGenericClass<>();
variable = variable2;
}
private void wildCardBounded() {
MyGenericClass<? extends Comparable> variable = new MyGenericClass<>();
MyGenericClass<Object> variable2 = new MyGenericClass<>();
// compile error: not comparable
variable = variable2;
}
private void wildCardBounded2() {
MyGenericClass<? super Comparable> variable = new MyGenericClass<>();
MyGenericClass<Object> variable2 = new MyGenericClass<>();
// legal because Object is super class of Comparable
variable = variable2;
}
}
Below is an example that uses bounded wildcard types:
public class UnionExample {
public static <E> Set<E> union(Set<? extends E> s1,
Set<? extends E> s2) {
//..
return null;
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Set<Integer> integers = Set.of(1, 2, 3);
Set<Double> doubles = Set.of(1.2, 2.3, 4.5);
Set<UnionExample> examples = new HashSet<>();
// valid
Set<Number> result = union(integers, doubles);
// compile error: UnionExample is not a subclass of Number
result = union(integers, examples);
}
}
Differences between Java Generics and C# Generics
The most important difference seems to be the "type erasure" concept. In Java, generics are a compile time structure, in runtime the type of the object is erased (
erasure) so you cannot have the type information at runtime. In C#, generics are also present at the CLR level, and you can get the type information at runtime.
It is an error in C# to create a Generic Type without providing any Type Arguments. Java permits creating Generic Types without providing any Type Arguments; these are called
raw types. This is because of backward compatibility. Compiler gives a warning and using raw types is a bad practice for modern java code.
In Java you cannot use your type variable of a class inside a static method:
public class GenericWithStaticMethod<Tgt;{
// compile error!
public static void doSomething(T a) {
}
}
You see this famous error message:
error: non-static class T cannot be referenced from a static context
Comments