Java List `of` method is quite confusingWhen do you use varargs in Java?Is Java “pass-by-reference” or “pass-by-value”?How do I check if a list is empty?Finding the index of an item given a list containing it in PythonDifference between append vs. extend list methods in PythonHow do I read / convert an InputStream into a String in Java?How do I generate random integers within a specific range in Java?How to make a flat list out of list of lists?How do I concatenate two lists in Python?How to clone or copy a list?Creating a memory leak with Java
Why doesn't Newton's third law mean a person bounces back to where they started when they hit the ground?
How do I create uniquely male characters?
How to write a macro that is braces sensitive?
How did the USSR manage to innovate in an environment characterized by government censorship and high bureaucracy?
Do VLANs within a subnet need to have their own subnet for router on a stick?
What are these boxed doors outside store fronts in New York?
Can an x86 CPU running in real mode be considered to be basically an 8086 CPU?
GPS Rollover on Android Smartphones
Shell script not opening as desktop application
How to test if a transaction is standard without spending real money?
The magic money tree problem
Is it unprofessional to ask if a job posting on GlassDoor is real?
Mathematical cryptic clues
Why has Russell's definition of numbers using equivalence classes been finally abandonned? ( If it has actually been abandonned).
Animated Series: Alien black spider robot crashes on Earth
Basic combinations logic doubt in probability
Do any Labour MPs support no-deal?
Why did the Germans forbid the possession of pet pigeons in Rostov-on-Don in 1941?
Is there really no realistic way for a skeleton monster to move around without magic?
Magento 2: Admin panel 3 level menu structure not working
Explain the parameters before and after @ in the treminal
Is it possible to do 50 km distance without any previous training?
Show that if two triangles built on parallel lines, with equal bases have the same perimeter only if they are congruent.
How old can references or sources in a thesis be?
Java List `of` method is quite confusing
When do you use varargs in Java?Is Java “pass-by-reference” or “pass-by-value”?How do I check if a list is empty?Finding the index of an item given a list containing it in PythonDifference between append vs. extend list methods in PythonHow do I read / convert an InputStream into a String in Java?How do I generate random integers within a specific range in Java?How to make a flat list out of list of lists?How do I concatenate two lists in Python?How to clone or copy a list?Creating a memory leak with Java
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
When I look at java documents at
List of
method
It is quite overloaded, with all the number of elements from 1 to 10...
And It says:
Returns an unmodifiable list containing five elements.
See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
Type Parameters:
E - the List's element type
Parameters:
e1 - the first element
e2 - the second element
e3 - the third element
e4 - the fourth element
e5 - the fifth element
I just don't understand this at all, and could find a way to even use this?
java list
add a comment |
When I look at java documents at
List of
method
It is quite overloaded, with all the number of elements from 1 to 10...
And It says:
Returns an unmodifiable list containing five elements.
See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
Type Parameters:
E - the List's element type
Parameters:
e1 - the first element
e2 - the second element
e3 - the third element
e4 - the fourth element
e5 - the fifth element
I just don't understand this at all, and could find a way to even use this?
java list
When I have a question about Java I search "<Java method> -site:oracle.com" because their docs are second worse to Github...
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 4:26
@Stepan What do u mean?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 4:31
Java docs are poorly written. There are no examples, just a list of flags. Github went a step down: used vague names for the flags and spits errors, but doesn't suggest solutions. When I search info about Java methods I tell search engine to hide/exclude oracle docs from the search results. Reading Oracle docs is usually a waste of the time.
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 14:21
So where do you usually go to check java methods? checking on people’s blogs?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 14:28
see my "-site" in the query. first reesults are usually good. ttps://www.google.com/search?q=java+list+of+method+-site%3Aoracle.com&oq=java+list+of+method+-site%3Aoracle.com
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 14:43
add a comment |
When I look at java documents at
List of
method
It is quite overloaded, with all the number of elements from 1 to 10...
And It says:
Returns an unmodifiable list containing five elements.
See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
Type Parameters:
E - the List's element type
Parameters:
e1 - the first element
e2 - the second element
e3 - the third element
e4 - the fourth element
e5 - the fifth element
I just don't understand this at all, and could find a way to even use this?
java list
When I look at java documents at
List of
method
It is quite overloaded, with all the number of elements from 1 to 10...
And It says:
Returns an unmodifiable list containing five elements.
See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
Type Parameters:
E - the List's element type
Parameters:
e1 - the first element
e2 - the second element
e3 - the third element
e4 - the fourth element
e5 - the fifth element
I just don't understand this at all, and could find a way to even use this?
java list
java list
edited Mar 9 at 3:34
Code_Control_jxie0755
asked Mar 9 at 3:28
Code_Control_jxie0755Code_Control_jxie0755
545416
545416
When I have a question about Java I search "<Java method> -site:oracle.com" because their docs are second worse to Github...
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 4:26
@Stepan What do u mean?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 4:31
Java docs are poorly written. There are no examples, just a list of flags. Github went a step down: used vague names for the flags and spits errors, but doesn't suggest solutions. When I search info about Java methods I tell search engine to hide/exclude oracle docs from the search results. Reading Oracle docs is usually a waste of the time.
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 14:21
So where do you usually go to check java methods? checking on people’s blogs?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 14:28
see my "-site" in the query. first reesults are usually good. ttps://www.google.com/search?q=java+list+of+method+-site%3Aoracle.com&oq=java+list+of+method+-site%3Aoracle.com
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 14:43
add a comment |
When I have a question about Java I search "<Java method> -site:oracle.com" because their docs are second worse to Github...
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 4:26
@Stepan What do u mean?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 4:31
Java docs are poorly written. There are no examples, just a list of flags. Github went a step down: used vague names for the flags and spits errors, but doesn't suggest solutions. When I search info about Java methods I tell search engine to hide/exclude oracle docs from the search results. Reading Oracle docs is usually a waste of the time.
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 14:21
So where do you usually go to check java methods? checking on people’s blogs?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 14:28
see my "-site" in the query. first reesults are usually good. ttps://www.google.com/search?q=java+list+of+method+-site%3Aoracle.com&oq=java+list+of+method+-site%3Aoracle.com
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 14:43
When I have a question about Java I search "<Java method> -site:oracle.com" because their docs are second worse to Github...
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 4:26
When I have a question about Java I search "<Java method> -site:oracle.com" because their docs are second worse to Github...
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 4:26
@Stepan What do u mean?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 4:31
@Stepan What do u mean?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 4:31
Java docs are poorly written. There are no examples, just a list of flags. Github went a step down: used vague names for the flags and spits errors, but doesn't suggest solutions. When I search info about Java methods I tell search engine to hide/exclude oracle docs from the search results. Reading Oracle docs is usually a waste of the time.
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 14:21
Java docs are poorly written. There are no examples, just a list of flags. Github went a step down: used vague names for the flags and spits errors, but doesn't suggest solutions. When I search info about Java methods I tell search engine to hide/exclude oracle docs from the search results. Reading Oracle docs is usually a waste of the time.
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 14:21
So where do you usually go to check java methods? checking on people’s blogs?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 14:28
So where do you usually go to check java methods? checking on people’s blogs?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 14:28
see my "-site" in the query. first reesults are usually good. ttps://www.google.com/search?q=java+list+of+method+-site%3Aoracle.com&oq=java+list+of+method+-site%3Aoracle.com
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 14:43
see my "-site" in the query. first reesults are usually good. ttps://www.google.com/search?q=java+list+of+method+-site%3Aoracle.com&oq=java+list+of+method+-site%3Aoracle.com
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 14:43
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
The List.of()
methods are convenient static helpers to create a fixed-size list in one call (instead of creating an empty list and then calling add
a few times). It so happens that the list returned by this call is unmodifiable (no elements may be added or removed).
As an example, compare:
ArrayList<String> supportedLanguages = new ArrayList<>();
supportedLanguages.add("en-us");
supportedLanguages.add("en-gb");
supportedLanguages.add("de");
to:
List<String> supportedLanguages = List.of("en-us", "en-gb", "de");
There happen to be eleven such overloads, taking from zero to ten elements (List.of()
turns to an empty unmodifiable list), and larger cases are handled using a vararg overload with signature @SafeVarargs static <E> List<E> of(E... elements)
.
I see. But why is it useful if I have:List<Integer> intList = new ArrayList<>(Arrays.asList(1,2,1,3,1,4));
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:37
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 because it is unmodifiable - you can't add or delete new elements. In your example, you can still add or delete elements.
– vs97
Mar 9 at 3:39
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 I can't speak to why, since it's a decision made by the developers of the Java SE API itself. I've never thought to use that version. BeforeList.of
was a thing I was working at a company whose internal libraries had anImmutableList.of(...)
in the same structure (overloads for 0-10 elements and varargs for more). From a cursory inspection I don't see any massive differences betweenArrays.asList
andList.of
, except for the fact that non-vararg overloads don't require the construction (and ultimately the gabage collection overhead) for a short-lived array)
– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:39
@vs97 so That is even better? I guess?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:39
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 You should strive for readability of code above anything else.List.of()
is very readable and almost rolls off the tongue. In my answer, I can almost effortlessly translate the second example to prose as "a list consisting of en-us, en-gb, and de".
– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:41
|
show 1 more comment
Since jdk-9
there are 10 overloaded methods and one vararg method List.of()
to create unmodifiable list, which mean you cannot modify the list by removing or adding elements to it.
static <E> List<E> of() //Returns an unmodifiable list containing zero elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing one element. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing two elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2, E e3) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing three elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
.
.
.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2, E e3, E e4, E e5, E e6, E e7, E e8, E e9, E e10) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing ten elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
@SafeVarargs static <E> List<E> of(E... elements) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing an arbitrary number of elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
And E
is type parameter to just create list of Generic type
List<Integer> list = List.of(1,2,3); // unmodifiable list with 3 integer elements
List<String> list = List.of("hello","world"); //// unmodifiable list with 2 string elements
Suppose if you need a list that can be accessible over application level and no one can modify the list, In that purpose you can choose them.
So this looks like a tuple to me, if it is in python...
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:41
yes exactly, but i have only limited knowledge in python @Code_Control_jxie0755
– Deadpool
Mar 9 at 3:42
add a comment |
The three interfaces List
, Set
, and Map
all gained the new overloaded .of
methods.
List< Integer > luckyNumbers = List.of( 7 , 11 , 42 ) ;
Set< DayOfWeek > weekend = Set.of( DayOfWeek.SATURDAY , DayOfWeek.SUNDAY ) ;
Map< DayOfWeek , Employee > dutyRoster =
Map.of(
DayOfWeek.MONDAY , alice ,
DayOfWeek.TUESDAY , bob ,
DayOfWeek.WEDNESDAY , alice ,
DayOfWeek.THURSDAY , carol ,
DayOfWeek.FRIDAY , carol
)
;
Convenience
Being able to declare and populate a List
, Set
, or Map
in a single line of code is quite convenient. Short, elegant, clearly expresses the programmer’s intention.
Not modifiable
Frequently, such short collections of objects are intended to be read-only. Meaning, the programmer using the collection cannot add, delete, or replace any of the collected objects.
Be aware that the content inside the collected objects may or may not be mutable. That is outside the scope of the collection’s duties.
The Collections
utility class provided ways to make a collection unmodifiable, but you had to go out of your way to make use of this feature. And doing so meant more lines of code. The new .of
methods are simpler.
Optimization
Note that you get back an object of the interface rather than a class. So for example, List
rather than ArrayList
, Set
rather than HashSet
, Map
rather than HashMap
. You have no idea what concrete class is in use by the returned object. Nor do you care.
This means the Java team is free to optimize the concrete implementation, changing the code from one release to another. They may even choose at runtime to use different implementations depending on the count or type of your objects being collected.
For example, if your collected objects are of an enum
type, then the highly-optimized EnumSet
could be used behind the scene to fulfill your request for a Set.of
. Likewise, EnumMap
for Map.of
. See the Set
and Map
code at the top of this Answers as examples of enum
objects being collected and therefore eligible for this optimization.
This freedom to optimize has been discussed by Brian Goetz and others.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55073707%2fjava-list-of-method-is-quite-confusing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The List.of()
methods are convenient static helpers to create a fixed-size list in one call (instead of creating an empty list and then calling add
a few times). It so happens that the list returned by this call is unmodifiable (no elements may be added or removed).
As an example, compare:
ArrayList<String> supportedLanguages = new ArrayList<>();
supportedLanguages.add("en-us");
supportedLanguages.add("en-gb");
supportedLanguages.add("de");
to:
List<String> supportedLanguages = List.of("en-us", "en-gb", "de");
There happen to be eleven such overloads, taking from zero to ten elements (List.of()
turns to an empty unmodifiable list), and larger cases are handled using a vararg overload with signature @SafeVarargs static <E> List<E> of(E... elements)
.
I see. But why is it useful if I have:List<Integer> intList = new ArrayList<>(Arrays.asList(1,2,1,3,1,4));
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:37
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 because it is unmodifiable - you can't add or delete new elements. In your example, you can still add or delete elements.
– vs97
Mar 9 at 3:39
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 I can't speak to why, since it's a decision made by the developers of the Java SE API itself. I've never thought to use that version. BeforeList.of
was a thing I was working at a company whose internal libraries had anImmutableList.of(...)
in the same structure (overloads for 0-10 elements and varargs for more). From a cursory inspection I don't see any massive differences betweenArrays.asList
andList.of
, except for the fact that non-vararg overloads don't require the construction (and ultimately the gabage collection overhead) for a short-lived array)
– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:39
@vs97 so That is even better? I guess?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:39
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 You should strive for readability of code above anything else.List.of()
is very readable and almost rolls off the tongue. In my answer, I can almost effortlessly translate the second example to prose as "a list consisting of en-us, en-gb, and de".
– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:41
|
show 1 more comment
The List.of()
methods are convenient static helpers to create a fixed-size list in one call (instead of creating an empty list and then calling add
a few times). It so happens that the list returned by this call is unmodifiable (no elements may be added or removed).
As an example, compare:
ArrayList<String> supportedLanguages = new ArrayList<>();
supportedLanguages.add("en-us");
supportedLanguages.add("en-gb");
supportedLanguages.add("de");
to:
List<String> supportedLanguages = List.of("en-us", "en-gb", "de");
There happen to be eleven such overloads, taking from zero to ten elements (List.of()
turns to an empty unmodifiable list), and larger cases are handled using a vararg overload with signature @SafeVarargs static <E> List<E> of(E... elements)
.
I see. But why is it useful if I have:List<Integer> intList = new ArrayList<>(Arrays.asList(1,2,1,3,1,4));
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:37
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 because it is unmodifiable - you can't add or delete new elements. In your example, you can still add or delete elements.
– vs97
Mar 9 at 3:39
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 I can't speak to why, since it's a decision made by the developers of the Java SE API itself. I've never thought to use that version. BeforeList.of
was a thing I was working at a company whose internal libraries had anImmutableList.of(...)
in the same structure (overloads for 0-10 elements and varargs for more). From a cursory inspection I don't see any massive differences betweenArrays.asList
andList.of
, except for the fact that non-vararg overloads don't require the construction (and ultimately the gabage collection overhead) for a short-lived array)
– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:39
@vs97 so That is even better? I guess?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:39
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 You should strive for readability of code above anything else.List.of()
is very readable and almost rolls off the tongue. In my answer, I can almost effortlessly translate the second example to prose as "a list consisting of en-us, en-gb, and de".
– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:41
|
show 1 more comment
The List.of()
methods are convenient static helpers to create a fixed-size list in one call (instead of creating an empty list and then calling add
a few times). It so happens that the list returned by this call is unmodifiable (no elements may be added or removed).
As an example, compare:
ArrayList<String> supportedLanguages = new ArrayList<>();
supportedLanguages.add("en-us");
supportedLanguages.add("en-gb");
supportedLanguages.add("de");
to:
List<String> supportedLanguages = List.of("en-us", "en-gb", "de");
There happen to be eleven such overloads, taking from zero to ten elements (List.of()
turns to an empty unmodifiable list), and larger cases are handled using a vararg overload with signature @SafeVarargs static <E> List<E> of(E... elements)
.
The List.of()
methods are convenient static helpers to create a fixed-size list in one call (instead of creating an empty list and then calling add
a few times). It so happens that the list returned by this call is unmodifiable (no elements may be added or removed).
As an example, compare:
ArrayList<String> supportedLanguages = new ArrayList<>();
supportedLanguages.add("en-us");
supportedLanguages.add("en-gb");
supportedLanguages.add("de");
to:
List<String> supportedLanguages = List.of("en-us", "en-gb", "de");
There happen to be eleven such overloads, taking from zero to ten elements (List.of()
turns to an empty unmodifiable list), and larger cases are handled using a vararg overload with signature @SafeVarargs static <E> List<E> of(E... elements)
.
edited Mar 9 at 3:37
answered Mar 9 at 3:35
Andrey AkhmetovAndrey Akhmetov
30.2k46290
30.2k46290
I see. But why is it useful if I have:List<Integer> intList = new ArrayList<>(Arrays.asList(1,2,1,3,1,4));
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:37
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 because it is unmodifiable - you can't add or delete new elements. In your example, you can still add or delete elements.
– vs97
Mar 9 at 3:39
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 I can't speak to why, since it's a decision made by the developers of the Java SE API itself. I've never thought to use that version. BeforeList.of
was a thing I was working at a company whose internal libraries had anImmutableList.of(...)
in the same structure (overloads for 0-10 elements and varargs for more). From a cursory inspection I don't see any massive differences betweenArrays.asList
andList.of
, except for the fact that non-vararg overloads don't require the construction (and ultimately the gabage collection overhead) for a short-lived array)
– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:39
@vs97 so That is even better? I guess?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:39
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 You should strive for readability of code above anything else.List.of()
is very readable and almost rolls off the tongue. In my answer, I can almost effortlessly translate the second example to prose as "a list consisting of en-us, en-gb, and de".
– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:41
|
show 1 more comment
I see. But why is it useful if I have:List<Integer> intList = new ArrayList<>(Arrays.asList(1,2,1,3,1,4));
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:37
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 because it is unmodifiable - you can't add or delete new elements. In your example, you can still add or delete elements.
– vs97
Mar 9 at 3:39
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 I can't speak to why, since it's a decision made by the developers of the Java SE API itself. I've never thought to use that version. BeforeList.of
was a thing I was working at a company whose internal libraries had anImmutableList.of(...)
in the same structure (overloads for 0-10 elements and varargs for more). From a cursory inspection I don't see any massive differences betweenArrays.asList
andList.of
, except for the fact that non-vararg overloads don't require the construction (and ultimately the gabage collection overhead) for a short-lived array)
– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:39
@vs97 so That is even better? I guess?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:39
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 You should strive for readability of code above anything else.List.of()
is very readable and almost rolls off the tongue. In my answer, I can almost effortlessly translate the second example to prose as "a list consisting of en-us, en-gb, and de".
– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:41
I see. But why is it useful if I have:
List<Integer> intList = new ArrayList<>(Arrays.asList(1,2,1,3,1,4));
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:37
I see. But why is it useful if I have:
List<Integer> intList = new ArrayList<>(Arrays.asList(1,2,1,3,1,4));
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:37
1
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 because it is unmodifiable - you can't add or delete new elements. In your example, you can still add or delete elements.
– vs97
Mar 9 at 3:39
@Code_Control_jxie0755 because it is unmodifiable - you can't add or delete new elements. In your example, you can still add or delete elements.
– vs97
Mar 9 at 3:39
1
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 I can't speak to why, since it's a decision made by the developers of the Java SE API itself. I've never thought to use that version. Before
List.of
was a thing I was working at a company whose internal libraries had an ImmutableList.of(...)
in the same structure (overloads for 0-10 elements and varargs for more). From a cursory inspection I don't see any massive differences between Arrays.asList
and List.of
, except for the fact that non-vararg overloads don't require the construction (and ultimately the gabage collection overhead) for a short-lived array)– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:39
@Code_Control_jxie0755 I can't speak to why, since it's a decision made by the developers of the Java SE API itself. I've never thought to use that version. Before
List.of
was a thing I was working at a company whose internal libraries had an ImmutableList.of(...)
in the same structure (overloads for 0-10 elements and varargs for more). From a cursory inspection I don't see any massive differences between Arrays.asList
and List.of
, except for the fact that non-vararg overloads don't require the construction (and ultimately the gabage collection overhead) for a short-lived array)– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:39
@vs97 so That is even better? I guess?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:39
@vs97 so That is even better? I guess?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:39
1
1
@Code_Control_jxie0755 You should strive for readability of code above anything else.
List.of()
is very readable and almost rolls off the tongue. In my answer, I can almost effortlessly translate the second example to prose as "a list consisting of en-us, en-gb, and de".– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:41
@Code_Control_jxie0755 You should strive for readability of code above anything else.
List.of()
is very readable and almost rolls off the tongue. In my answer, I can almost effortlessly translate the second example to prose as "a list consisting of en-us, en-gb, and de".– Andrey Akhmetov
Mar 9 at 3:41
|
show 1 more comment
Since jdk-9
there are 10 overloaded methods and one vararg method List.of()
to create unmodifiable list, which mean you cannot modify the list by removing or adding elements to it.
static <E> List<E> of() //Returns an unmodifiable list containing zero elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing one element. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing two elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2, E e3) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing three elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
.
.
.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2, E e3, E e4, E e5, E e6, E e7, E e8, E e9, E e10) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing ten elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
@SafeVarargs static <E> List<E> of(E... elements) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing an arbitrary number of elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
And E
is type parameter to just create list of Generic type
List<Integer> list = List.of(1,2,3); // unmodifiable list with 3 integer elements
List<String> list = List.of("hello","world"); //// unmodifiable list with 2 string elements
Suppose if you need a list that can be accessible over application level and no one can modify the list, In that purpose you can choose them.
So this looks like a tuple to me, if it is in python...
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:41
yes exactly, but i have only limited knowledge in python @Code_Control_jxie0755
– Deadpool
Mar 9 at 3:42
add a comment |
Since jdk-9
there are 10 overloaded methods and one vararg method List.of()
to create unmodifiable list, which mean you cannot modify the list by removing or adding elements to it.
static <E> List<E> of() //Returns an unmodifiable list containing zero elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing one element. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing two elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2, E e3) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing three elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
.
.
.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2, E e3, E e4, E e5, E e6, E e7, E e8, E e9, E e10) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing ten elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
@SafeVarargs static <E> List<E> of(E... elements) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing an arbitrary number of elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
And E
is type parameter to just create list of Generic type
List<Integer> list = List.of(1,2,3); // unmodifiable list with 3 integer elements
List<String> list = List.of("hello","world"); //// unmodifiable list with 2 string elements
Suppose if you need a list that can be accessible over application level and no one can modify the list, In that purpose you can choose them.
So this looks like a tuple to me, if it is in python...
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:41
yes exactly, but i have only limited knowledge in python @Code_Control_jxie0755
– Deadpool
Mar 9 at 3:42
add a comment |
Since jdk-9
there are 10 overloaded methods and one vararg method List.of()
to create unmodifiable list, which mean you cannot modify the list by removing or adding elements to it.
static <E> List<E> of() //Returns an unmodifiable list containing zero elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing one element. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing two elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2, E e3) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing three elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
.
.
.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2, E e3, E e4, E e5, E e6, E e7, E e8, E e9, E e10) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing ten elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
@SafeVarargs static <E> List<E> of(E... elements) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing an arbitrary number of elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
And E
is type parameter to just create list of Generic type
List<Integer> list = List.of(1,2,3); // unmodifiable list with 3 integer elements
List<String> list = List.of("hello","world"); //// unmodifiable list with 2 string elements
Suppose if you need a list that can be accessible over application level and no one can modify the list, In that purpose you can choose them.
Since jdk-9
there are 10 overloaded methods and one vararg method List.of()
to create unmodifiable list, which mean you cannot modify the list by removing or adding elements to it.
static <E> List<E> of() //Returns an unmodifiable list containing zero elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing one element. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing two elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2, E e3) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing three elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
.
.
.
static <E> List<E> of(E e1, E e2, E e3, E e4, E e5, E e6, E e7, E e8, E e9, E e10) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing ten elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
@SafeVarargs static <E> List<E> of(E... elements) //Returns an unmodifiable list containing an arbitrary number of elements. See Unmodifiable Lists for details.
And E
is type parameter to just create list of Generic type
List<Integer> list = List.of(1,2,3); // unmodifiable list with 3 integer elements
List<String> list = List.of("hello","world"); //// unmodifiable list with 2 string elements
Suppose if you need a list that can be accessible over application level and no one can modify the list, In that purpose you can choose them.
edited Mar 9 at 3:47
answered Mar 9 at 3:37
DeadpoolDeadpool
7,8322831
7,8322831
So this looks like a tuple to me, if it is in python...
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:41
yes exactly, but i have only limited knowledge in python @Code_Control_jxie0755
– Deadpool
Mar 9 at 3:42
add a comment |
So this looks like a tuple to me, if it is in python...
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:41
yes exactly, but i have only limited knowledge in python @Code_Control_jxie0755
– Deadpool
Mar 9 at 3:42
So this looks like a tuple to me, if it is in python...
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:41
So this looks like a tuple to me, if it is in python...
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 3:41
yes exactly, but i have only limited knowledge in python @Code_Control_jxie0755
– Deadpool
Mar 9 at 3:42
yes exactly, but i have only limited knowledge in python @Code_Control_jxie0755
– Deadpool
Mar 9 at 3:42
add a comment |
The three interfaces List
, Set
, and Map
all gained the new overloaded .of
methods.
List< Integer > luckyNumbers = List.of( 7 , 11 , 42 ) ;
Set< DayOfWeek > weekend = Set.of( DayOfWeek.SATURDAY , DayOfWeek.SUNDAY ) ;
Map< DayOfWeek , Employee > dutyRoster =
Map.of(
DayOfWeek.MONDAY , alice ,
DayOfWeek.TUESDAY , bob ,
DayOfWeek.WEDNESDAY , alice ,
DayOfWeek.THURSDAY , carol ,
DayOfWeek.FRIDAY , carol
)
;
Convenience
Being able to declare and populate a List
, Set
, or Map
in a single line of code is quite convenient. Short, elegant, clearly expresses the programmer’s intention.
Not modifiable
Frequently, such short collections of objects are intended to be read-only. Meaning, the programmer using the collection cannot add, delete, or replace any of the collected objects.
Be aware that the content inside the collected objects may or may not be mutable. That is outside the scope of the collection’s duties.
The Collections
utility class provided ways to make a collection unmodifiable, but you had to go out of your way to make use of this feature. And doing so meant more lines of code. The new .of
methods are simpler.
Optimization
Note that you get back an object of the interface rather than a class. So for example, List
rather than ArrayList
, Set
rather than HashSet
, Map
rather than HashMap
. You have no idea what concrete class is in use by the returned object. Nor do you care.
This means the Java team is free to optimize the concrete implementation, changing the code from one release to another. They may even choose at runtime to use different implementations depending on the count or type of your objects being collected.
For example, if your collected objects are of an enum
type, then the highly-optimized EnumSet
could be used behind the scene to fulfill your request for a Set.of
. Likewise, EnumMap
for Map.of
. See the Set
and Map
code at the top of this Answers as examples of enum
objects being collected and therefore eligible for this optimization.
This freedom to optimize has been discussed by Brian Goetz and others.
add a comment |
The three interfaces List
, Set
, and Map
all gained the new overloaded .of
methods.
List< Integer > luckyNumbers = List.of( 7 , 11 , 42 ) ;
Set< DayOfWeek > weekend = Set.of( DayOfWeek.SATURDAY , DayOfWeek.SUNDAY ) ;
Map< DayOfWeek , Employee > dutyRoster =
Map.of(
DayOfWeek.MONDAY , alice ,
DayOfWeek.TUESDAY , bob ,
DayOfWeek.WEDNESDAY , alice ,
DayOfWeek.THURSDAY , carol ,
DayOfWeek.FRIDAY , carol
)
;
Convenience
Being able to declare and populate a List
, Set
, or Map
in a single line of code is quite convenient. Short, elegant, clearly expresses the programmer’s intention.
Not modifiable
Frequently, such short collections of objects are intended to be read-only. Meaning, the programmer using the collection cannot add, delete, or replace any of the collected objects.
Be aware that the content inside the collected objects may or may not be mutable. That is outside the scope of the collection’s duties.
The Collections
utility class provided ways to make a collection unmodifiable, but you had to go out of your way to make use of this feature. And doing so meant more lines of code. The new .of
methods are simpler.
Optimization
Note that you get back an object of the interface rather than a class. So for example, List
rather than ArrayList
, Set
rather than HashSet
, Map
rather than HashMap
. You have no idea what concrete class is in use by the returned object. Nor do you care.
This means the Java team is free to optimize the concrete implementation, changing the code from one release to another. They may even choose at runtime to use different implementations depending on the count or type of your objects being collected.
For example, if your collected objects are of an enum
type, then the highly-optimized EnumSet
could be used behind the scene to fulfill your request for a Set.of
. Likewise, EnumMap
for Map.of
. See the Set
and Map
code at the top of this Answers as examples of enum
objects being collected and therefore eligible for this optimization.
This freedom to optimize has been discussed by Brian Goetz and others.
add a comment |
The three interfaces List
, Set
, and Map
all gained the new overloaded .of
methods.
List< Integer > luckyNumbers = List.of( 7 , 11 , 42 ) ;
Set< DayOfWeek > weekend = Set.of( DayOfWeek.SATURDAY , DayOfWeek.SUNDAY ) ;
Map< DayOfWeek , Employee > dutyRoster =
Map.of(
DayOfWeek.MONDAY , alice ,
DayOfWeek.TUESDAY , bob ,
DayOfWeek.WEDNESDAY , alice ,
DayOfWeek.THURSDAY , carol ,
DayOfWeek.FRIDAY , carol
)
;
Convenience
Being able to declare and populate a List
, Set
, or Map
in a single line of code is quite convenient. Short, elegant, clearly expresses the programmer’s intention.
Not modifiable
Frequently, such short collections of objects are intended to be read-only. Meaning, the programmer using the collection cannot add, delete, or replace any of the collected objects.
Be aware that the content inside the collected objects may or may not be mutable. That is outside the scope of the collection’s duties.
The Collections
utility class provided ways to make a collection unmodifiable, but you had to go out of your way to make use of this feature. And doing so meant more lines of code. The new .of
methods are simpler.
Optimization
Note that you get back an object of the interface rather than a class. So for example, List
rather than ArrayList
, Set
rather than HashSet
, Map
rather than HashMap
. You have no idea what concrete class is in use by the returned object. Nor do you care.
This means the Java team is free to optimize the concrete implementation, changing the code from one release to another. They may even choose at runtime to use different implementations depending on the count or type of your objects being collected.
For example, if your collected objects are of an enum
type, then the highly-optimized EnumSet
could be used behind the scene to fulfill your request for a Set.of
. Likewise, EnumMap
for Map.of
. See the Set
and Map
code at the top of this Answers as examples of enum
objects being collected and therefore eligible for this optimization.
This freedom to optimize has been discussed by Brian Goetz and others.
The three interfaces List
, Set
, and Map
all gained the new overloaded .of
methods.
List< Integer > luckyNumbers = List.of( 7 , 11 , 42 ) ;
Set< DayOfWeek > weekend = Set.of( DayOfWeek.SATURDAY , DayOfWeek.SUNDAY ) ;
Map< DayOfWeek , Employee > dutyRoster =
Map.of(
DayOfWeek.MONDAY , alice ,
DayOfWeek.TUESDAY , bob ,
DayOfWeek.WEDNESDAY , alice ,
DayOfWeek.THURSDAY , carol ,
DayOfWeek.FRIDAY , carol
)
;
Convenience
Being able to declare and populate a List
, Set
, or Map
in a single line of code is quite convenient. Short, elegant, clearly expresses the programmer’s intention.
Not modifiable
Frequently, such short collections of objects are intended to be read-only. Meaning, the programmer using the collection cannot add, delete, or replace any of the collected objects.
Be aware that the content inside the collected objects may or may not be mutable. That is outside the scope of the collection’s duties.
The Collections
utility class provided ways to make a collection unmodifiable, but you had to go out of your way to make use of this feature. And doing so meant more lines of code. The new .of
methods are simpler.
Optimization
Note that you get back an object of the interface rather than a class. So for example, List
rather than ArrayList
, Set
rather than HashSet
, Map
rather than HashMap
. You have no idea what concrete class is in use by the returned object. Nor do you care.
This means the Java team is free to optimize the concrete implementation, changing the code from one release to another. They may even choose at runtime to use different implementations depending on the count or type of your objects being collected.
For example, if your collected objects are of an enum
type, then the highly-optimized EnumSet
could be used behind the scene to fulfill your request for a Set.of
. Likewise, EnumMap
for Map.of
. See the Set
and Map
code at the top of this Answers as examples of enum
objects being collected and therefore eligible for this optimization.
This freedom to optimize has been discussed by Brian Goetz and others.
edited Mar 9 at 4:30
answered Mar 9 at 3:53
Basil BourqueBasil Bourque
117k30397560
117k30397560
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55073707%2fjava-list-of-method-is-quite-confusing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
When I have a question about Java I search "<Java method> -site:oracle.com" because their docs are second worse to Github...
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 4:26
@Stepan What do u mean?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 4:31
Java docs are poorly written. There are no examples, just a list of flags. Github went a step down: used vague names for the flags and spits errors, but doesn't suggest solutions. When I search info about Java methods I tell search engine to hide/exclude oracle docs from the search results. Reading Oracle docs is usually a waste of the time.
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 14:21
So where do you usually go to check java methods? checking on people’s blogs?
– Code_Control_jxie0755
Mar 9 at 14:28
see my "-site" in the query. first reesults are usually good. ttps://www.google.com/search?q=java+list+of+method+-site%3Aoracle.com&oq=java+list+of+method+-site%3Aoracle.com
– Stepan
Mar 9 at 14:43