 Time series modeling in f#-- seq vs array vs vector vs list vs generic list
By : Karen Pugh
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
help you fix your problem As a concrete representation you can choose either array or list or some other .NET colllection type. A sequence seq<'T> is an abstract type and both array and list are automatically also sequences - this means that when you write some code that works with sequences, it will work with any concrete data type (array, list or any other .NET collection).
So, when writing data processing, you can use Seq by default (as it gives you great flexibility - it doesn't matter what concrete representation you use) and then optimize some operations to use the concrete representation (whatever that will be) if you need something to run faster.
|
 Converting generic list to generic array
By : Fadhil
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
will be helpful for those in need You can use items.toArray(new CountedItem[items.size()]); with warning. But your code is not clean and type safe after this modification.
Also you can add @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") to get rid of warning.
|
how to convert a generic List to a generic array in Java?
By : King Schultz
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
I hope this helps . As n247s suggested, you should use the same parameterized type for class and methods if you want to have a consistence between them. It asks another question : if you do it, you should not mix oranges and bananas since otherwise your sort could give unexpected results. Suppose, you put in the array or in the List, a mix of Comparable objects which are not designed to be compared between them : String, Boolean, CustomClassWhichIsComparable code :
public <T extends Comparable> void sort(List<T> l){
T[] array = (T[]) new Object[l.size()];
sort(l.toArray(T[] array));
}
public void sort(List<T> l) {
T[] array = (T[]) new Comparable[l.size()];
sort(l.toArray(array));
}
public class Sort<T extends Comparable<T>> {
T tmp;
public void sort(T[] l) {
for (int i = 0; i < l.length; i++) {
for (int j = i + 1; j < l.length; j++) {
if (l[i].compareTo(l[j]) > 0) {
tmp = l[i];
l[i] = l[j];
l[j] = tmp;
}
}
}
System.out.println(Arrays.asList(l));
}
public void sort(List<T> l) {
T[] array = (T[]) new Comparable[l.size()];
sort(l.toArray(array));
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Integer[] i = { 2, 4, 1, 5, 3 };
Sort<Integer> sortInt = new Sort<Integer>();
sortInt.sort(i);
Sort<String> sortString = new Sort<String>();
List<String> l = Arrays.asList("c", "d", "a", "e", "b");
sortString.sort(l);
}
}
|
 What is difference b/w Generic List and Arraylist, Generic List Vs HashTable, Generic List Vs No Generic?
By : user3913007
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
wish help you to fix your issue Basically, generic collections are type-safe at compile time: you specify which type of object the collection should contain, and the type system will make sure you only put that kind of object in it. Furthermore, you don't need to cast the item when you get it out.
As an example, suppose we wanted a collection of strings. We could use ArrayList like this:
|
Generic List and Generic Array
By : Binod Nirvan
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
I think the issue was by ths following , The reason is that generics are implemented using type erasure:
No type X is known at runtime. That means that you can't instantiate an array of that (unknown type).
|
» 
code :
Related Posts :