On 10/14/15 5:56 AM, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
Map<Integer,Character> m1 = MyCollections.<Integer,Character>
ofKeys( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
.vals( 'a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e');
Yes, we considered a bunch of different alternatives.
It looks like you're wrestling a bit with type inference :-), given that you had
to invoke this with a type witness. The issue here is that the target type
doesn't back-propagate through the chained method call .vals() to the call of
.ofKeys(). Incidentally, a similar problem occurs in the "obvious" builder
approach of doing something like this:
Map<Integer,Character> map = Map.builder()
.add(1, 'a')
.add(2, 'b')
....
.build();
It's possible to pursue workarounds for this problem, but then you're heading
down the rabbit hole....
A quasi-syntactic issue is that it's preferable to have each key and value next
to each other, so that each pair can be on its own line. This makes it easier to
maintain. If all the keys are listed together first, followed by all the values,
the pairing can only be made to work if they're all short and if there are few
enough pairs (as in your example). Things start to break down if the keys/values
themselves are long, or if there are a lot of them, pushing the keys and values
lists onto multiple lines. Consider my example from the head of the thread:
Map<String,TypeUse> m = Map.ofEntries(
entry("CDATA", CBuiltinLeafInfo.NORMALIZED_STRING),
entry("ENTITY", CBuiltinLeafInfo.TOKEN),
entry("ENTITIES", CBuiltinLeafInfo.STRING.makeCollection()),
entry("ENUMERATION", CBuiltinLeafInfo.STRING.makeCollection()),
entry("NMTOKEN", CBuiltinLeafInfo.TOKEN),
entry("NMTOKENS", CBuiltinLeafInfo.STRING.makeCollection()),
entry("ID", CBuiltinLeafInfo.ID),
entry("IDREF", CBuiltinLeafInfo.IDREF),
entry("IDREFS",
TypeUseFactory.makeCollection(CBuiltinLeafInfo.IDREF));
entry("ENUMERATION", CBuiltinLeafInfo.TOKEN));
Maintaining the association between keys and values is challenge. Here's my
attempt, where keys and values are associated by indentation level:
Map<String,TypeUse> m = Map.<String,TypeUse>
ofKeys("CDATA",
"ENTITY",
"ENTITIES",
"ENUMERATION",
"NMTOKEN",
"NMTOKENS",
"ID",
"IDREF",
"IDREFS",
"ENUMERATION")
.vals( CBuiltinLeafInfo.NORMALIZED_STRING,
CBuiltinLeafInfo.TOKEN,
CBuiltinLeafInfo.STRING.makeCollection(),
CBuiltinLeafInfo.STRING.makeCollection(),
CBuiltinLeafInfo.TOKEN,
CBuiltinLeafInfo.STRING.makeCollection(),
CBuiltinLeafInfo.ID,
CBuiltinLeafInfo.IDREF),
TypeUseFactory.makeCollection(CBuiltinLeafInfo.IDREF),
CBuiltinLeafInfo.TOKEN);
With more pairs, the distance between each key and its corresponding value also
increases. You could try to reduce the vertical distance by filling the lines
(more keys/values per line) but that makes the association challenges even
harder. Finally, consider the pain of inserting or removing a key/value pair
from the middle.
s'marks
