How Predicate maintain state in Java 8 - java-8

I am looking at this code and trying to understand the following piece of code.
copied from Stuart Marks answer
public static <T> Predicate<T> distinctByKey(Function<? super T,Object> keyExtractor) {
Map<Object,Boolean> seen = new ConcurrentHashMap<>();
return t -> seen.putIfAbsent(keyExtractor.apply(t), Boolean.TRUE) == null;
}
BigDecimal totalShare = orders.stream()
.filter(distinctByKey(o -> o.getCompany().getId()))
.map(Order::getShare)
.reduce(BigDecimal.ZERO, BigDecimal::add);
My question here is everytime distinctByKey will be called and resulting new ConcurrentHashMap. how it is maintaining the state using new ConcurrentHashMap<>(); ?

Since this is a capturing lambda, indeed a new Predicate instance will be returned all the time on each call to distinctByKey; but this will happen per entire stream, not per each individual element.
If you are willing to run your example with:
Djdk.internal.lambda.dumpProxyClasses=/Your/Path/Here
you would see that a class is generated for your the implementation of the Predicate. Because this is a stateful lambda - it captures the CHM and Function, it will have a private constructor and a static factory method that returns an instance.
Each call of distinctByKey will produce a different instance, but that instance will be reused for each element of the Stream. Things might be a bit more obvious if you run this example:
public static <T> Predicate<T> distinctByKey(Function<? super T,Object> keyExtractor) {
Map<Object,Boolean> seen = new ConcurrentHashMap<>();
Predicate<T> predicate = t -> {
Object obj = keyExtractor.apply(t);
System.out.println("stream element : " + obj);
return seen.putIfAbsent(obj, Boolean.TRUE) == null;
};
System.out.println("Predicate with hash :" + predicate.hashCode());
return predicate;
}
#Getter
#AllArgsConstructor
static class User {
private final String name;
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Stream.of(new User("a"), new User("b"))
.filter(distinctByKey(User::getName))
.collect(Collectors.toList());
}
This will output:
Predicate with hash :1259475182
stream element : a
stream element : b
A single Predicate for both elements of the Stream.
If you add another filter:
Stream.of(new User("a"), new User("b"))
.filter(distinctByKey(User::getName))
.filter(distinctByKey(User::getName))
.collect(Collectors.toList());
There will be two Predicates:
Predicate with hash :1259475182
Predicate with hash :1072591677
stream element : a
stream element : a
stream element : b
stream element : b

It seems pretty confusing but it’s quite simple. What actually happens is that the distinctByKey method is called only once so there will only ever be one instance of the ConcurrentHashMap and it’s captured by the lambda expression. So when the distinctByKey method returns a Predicate object we then apply that to every element of the stream.

Related

How can I test a session method?

I'm trying to #Test a Service class but there are several get() methods that I don't know how to test. I would need to know how to collect the data that is necessary or at least how to test the rest of the methods of the TokenHelper class.
This is the Session class:
public class SessionData {
public static final String KEY = "session_data";
private Integer id;
private String email;
private String fullName;
private List<Role> role;
private Boolean tempSession;
private int permissionsMask = 0;
private String avatar;
public boolean hasAnyRole(Role... roles) {
for (Role r : roles) {
if (this.role.contains(r)) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
}
This is the TokenHelper class:
public class TokenHelper {
public String generate(SessionData tokenData, long expirationInHours) {
return Jwts.builder()
.claim(SessionData.KEY, tokenData)
.setIssuedAt(Date.from(Instant.now()))
.setExpiration(Date.from(Instant.now().plus(expirationInHours, ChronoUnit.HOURS)))
.signWith(SignatureAlgorithm.HS256, TextCodec.BASE64.encode(secret))
.compact();
}
public UserGoogle getTokenDataFromGoogleToken(String token) throws InvalidTokenException {
try {
int i = token.lastIndexOf('.');
String withoutSignature = token.substring(0, i + 1);
Claims claims = Jwts.parser().parseClaimsJwt(withoutSignature).getBody();
return UserGoogle.builder()
.email(claims.get(UserGoogle.KEY_EMAIL).toString())
.firstName(claims.get(UserGoogle.KEY_FIST_NAME).toString())
.lastName(claims.get(UserGoogle.KEY_LAST_NAME).toString()).build();
} catch (ExpiredJwtException | MalformedJwtException | SignatureException | IllegalArgumentException ex) {
log.error(ERROR_TOKEN, ex.toString());
throw new InvalidTokenException();
}
}
}
This is my #Test:
#Test
void googleTokenHelperTest() throws InvalidTokenException {
TokenHelper obj1 = BeanBuilder.builder(TokenHelper.class).createRandomBean();
String mailGoogle = "google#prueba.com";
String firstGoogle = "Nombre";
String lastGoogle = "Apellido";
Map<String, Object> pruebaGoogle = new HashMap<String, Object>();
List<String> info = new ArrayList<String>();
info.add(firstGoogle);
info.add(lastGoogle);
pruebaGoogle.put(mailGoogle, info);
UserGoogle expectedUser = UserGoogle.builder().email(mailGoogle).firstName(firstGoogle).lastName(lastGoogle).build();
String myTestToken = pruebaGoogle.toString();
UserGoogle actualUser = obj1.getTokenDataFromGoogleToken(myTestToken);
assertEquals(actualUser, expectedUser);
}
I have created some variables to form a user, but I need to build them with a map to generate the token with the help of the generate () method. I need to know how to join those three variables and pass them to the generate () method, and then pass the result variable to the google method to generate the new user.
Edit: After clarification by OP the topic of the question changed.
Your problem arises from a flawed Object-Orientation-Design. For example, your SessionData implicitly holds a User by having String-fields relevant to a User among fields relevant to a Session. This overlapping makes it hard to test your code, because in order to test your Token-Generation for some User data, you need a Session object, which introduces additional data and dependencies.
That is one major reason, why it's difficult for you, to get a token from your three input values.
You want to test getTokenDataFromGoogleToken(String token). First thing you need to know is, what a valid Token-String will look like.
Next, you will need to mock your Claims claims object in one of two ways:
Mockito.mock it using Mockito to return the necessary Strings when claims.get() is called.
Mockito.mock your Jwts.parser().parseClaimsJwt(withoutSignature).getBody() to return a Claims object that serves your testing purpose.
Since the signature of your token will be irrelevant to your tested method, just focus on the substring before the .-Separator, i.e. the part after . in your token string can be any string you like.
If you want to test generate(SessionData, long) you need to supply a SessionData Object and a long value. After that you assertEquals the String as necessary. However, currently your code does not imply that your get is in any way related to your generate. This is, because you just handle Strings. A better design would be to have e.g. a User, Session and Token-classes, which would also make it easier to test your application and units.
A Test for your getToken method looks like the following, you just have to replace ... with your test data.
#Test
void givenGoogleToken_whenTokenHelperGeneratesUserFromToken_UserOk() {
TokenHelper helper = new TokenHelper();
String myTestToken = ...; //
UserGoogle expectedUser = ... // generate the UserGoogle Object you expect to obtain from your TokenHelper class
UserGoogle actualUser = helper.getTokenDataFromGoogleToken(myTestToken);
assertEquals(actualUser, expectedUser);
}
Test generally follow a given-when-then structure. Given some precondition, when some action is performed, then some result is returned/behaviour observed. When implemented very formally, this is called BDD (Behaviour Driven Development), but even when not practicing BDD, tests still generally follow that pattern.
In this case, I would suggest the tests be something like:
Given some data exists in the service threaddata
when I call get
then I get back the expected value
In the scenario above, the given part probably consists of setting some data on the service, the when is invoking get and the then is asserting that it's the expected value.
And I'd encourage you to consider the various scenarios. E.g what happens if the data isn't there? what happens if it's not the class the consumer asks for? Is the map case-sensitive? etc...
Code sample for the initial instance (I'm not sure what BeanBuilder is here, so I've omitted it):
#Test
public void testCurrentThreadServiceReturnsExpectedValue() {
final String key = "TEST KEY";
final String value = "TEST VALUE";
//Initialize System Under Test
CurrentThreadService sut = new CurrentThreadService();
//Given - precondition
sut.set(key, value);
//When - retrieve value
String observedValue = sut.get(key, String.class);
//Then - value is as expected
assertEquals(value, observedValue);
}
EDIT TO ADD It's always great to see someone get into unit testing, so if you have any follow ups, please ask I'm happy to help. The confidence one derives from well tested code is a great thing for software devs.

SpEL parsing parameters with "Collectors.toList()" in stream won't work as expressionString?

This will work
parser.parseExpression("#configList.stream().toArray()").getValue(context)
but the following won't
parser.parseExpression("#configList.stream().map(o -> o.ruleId).collect(Collectors.toList())").getValue(context)
F.Y.I the context is constructed as follows:
Object[] args = joinPoint.getArgs();
Method method = ((MethodSignature) joinPoint.getSignature()).getMethod();
String[] params = discoverer.getParameterNames(method);
EvaluationContext context = new StandardEvaluationContext();
for (int i = 0; i < params.length; i++) {
context.setVariable(params[i], args[i]);
}
Although Java can be used in SPeL expressions, SPeL itself is a separate language and does not fully support the Java language. From the documentation:
SpEL is based on a technology agnostic API allowing other expression language implementations to be integrated should the need arise.
To perform filtering and mapping operations on a List in a SPeL expression, use collection selection and collection projection respectively:
Collection selection example
// Java:
configList.stream().filter(o -> o.getRuleId() > 2).collect(Collectors.toList())
// SPeL (notice the question mark) :
"#configList.?[ruleId>2]"
Collection projection example
// Java:
configList.stream().map(o -> o.getRuleId()).collect(Collectors.toList())
// SPeL (notice the exclamation mark) :
"#configList.![ruleId]"
I have set up a small example to demonstrate it:
public class So64738543ExpressionTest {
public static class RuleItem {
private int ruleId;
public RuleItem(int ruleId) {
this.ruleId = ruleId;
}
public int getRuleId() {
return ruleId;
}
}
#Test
public void collectionProjection() {
List<RuleItem> ruleItems = Arrays.asList(new RuleItem(1), new RuleItem(2), new RuleItem(3));
EvaluationContext context = new StandardEvaluationContext(ruleItems);
Expression expression = new SpelExpressionParser().parseExpression("#root.![ruleId]");
Assert.assertEquals(Arrays.asList(1,2,3), expression.getValue(context));
}
}
[edit]
Furthermore, if a SPeL expression becomes increasingly complex, I highly recommend to move the expression to a static method and invoke it using a T operator. Don't forget to include the fully qualified package name when referring to the static method.

OCPJP 8 II Consumer vs Supplier IZ0-809

I am trying to get IZO-809 certification I was reading the OCA/OCP SE8 test book and a code really caught my attention.
The code gets me to this question.
I know consumer get a parameter and not return nothing and Supplier has not parameters and returns a value.
But this code is almost the same after the ->.
public class Pregunta24{
private final Object obj;
public Pregunta24(final Object obj){
this.obj = obj;
}
}
//Returns a Supplier
private final Supplier<Pregunta24>supplier = ()->new Pregunta24("HI");
//Returns a Consumer.
private final Consumer<Pregunta24>consumer = a->new Pregunta24(a);
Both codes work.
But if this code not work i know that consumer doesn't return nothing.
private final Consumer<String>consumerString = String::length
I know this not work because consumer doesn't return a value my question is in the supplier code and the consumer code the code is right after the -> mark but this time is considered return in fact a instance of the class.
My question is why sometimes Java complaints that is a return value and something not?
I mean this code.
private final Supplier<Pregunta24>supplier = ()->new Pregunta24("HI");
// I would think is returning a instance of the Pregunta24 class.
private final Consumer<Pregunts24>consumer = a->new Pregunta24(a);
Is returning the same after the -> but why in the consumer don't say the error.
incompatible types: bad return type in lambda expression
But if do this I do
final Consumer<String>consumerString = a->1;
I think the code after the -> is context inferred.
According to javadoc Consumer:
Represents an operation that accepts a single input argument and
returns no result.
Consumer<Pregunts24>consumer = a->new Pregunta24(a);
doesn't actually return anything. This basically is implementation of Consumer#accept method, which accepts an object of type T and has void as return type.
public void accept(Pregunta24 a) {
new Pregunta24(a);
}
You are not returning anything. Same thing with
Consumer<String>consumerString = String::length
public void accept(String a) {
a.length();
}
However
Consumer<String>consumerString = a->1;
is an invalid expression which is translated to something like this:
public void accept(String a) {
1;
}

Sort a list of objects based on a parameterized attribute of the object

Assuming that we have an object with the following attributes:
public class MyObject {
private String attr1;
private Integer attr2;
//...
public String getAttr1() {
return this.attr1;
}
public Integer getAttr2() {
return this.attr2;
}
}
One way of sorting a list mylist of this object, based on its attribute attr1 is:
mylist.sort(Comparator.comparing(MyObject::getAttr1));
Is it possible to use this code inside a method in a dynamic way and replace the getAttr1 part with a method that returns the getter of an attribute of the object based on its name? Something like:
public void sortListByAttr(List<MyObject> list, String attr) {
list.sort(Comparator.comparing(MyObject::getGetterByAttr(attr)));
}
The MyObject::getGetterByAttr(attr) part does not compile, I wrote it just as an example to explain my idea
I tried to implement a method with the following code new PropertyDescriptor(attr, MyObject.class).getReadMethod().invoke(new MyObject()) but It's still not possible to call a method with a parameter from the comparing method
You could add a method like
public static Function<MyObject,Object> getGetterByAttr(String s) {
switch(s) {
case "attr1": return MyObject::getAttr1;
case "attr2": return MyObject::getAttr2;
}
throw new IllegalArgumentException(s);
}
to your class, but the returned function is not suitable for Comparator.comparing, as it expects a type fulfilling U extends Comparable<? super U> and while each of String and Integer is capable of fulfilling this constraint in an individual invocation, there is no way to declare a generic return type for getGetterByAttr to allow both type and be still compatible with the declaration of comparing.
An alternative would be a factory for complete Comparators.
public static Comparator<MyObject> getComparator(String s) {
switch(s) {
case "attr1": return Comparator.comparing(MyObject::getAttr1);
case "attr2": return Comparator.comparing(MyObject::getAttr2);
}
throw new IllegalArgumentException(s);
}
to be used like
public void sortListByAttr(List<MyObject> list, String attr) {
list.sort(getComparator(attr));
}
This has the advantage that it also may support properties whose type is not Comparable and requires a custom Comparator. Also, more efficient comparators for primitive types (e.g. using comparingInt) would be possible.
You may also consider using a Map instead of switch:
private static Map<String,Comparator<MyObject>> COMPARATORS;
static {
Map<String,Comparator<MyObject>> comparators=new HashMap<>();
comparators.put("attr1", Comparator.comparing(MyObject::getAttr1));
comparators.put("attr2", Comparator.comparing(MyObject::getAttr2));
COMPARATORS = Collections.unmodifiableMap(comparators);
}
public static Comparator<MyObject> getComparator(String s) {
Comparator<MyObject> comparator = COMPARATORS.get(s);
if(comparator != null) return comparator;
throw new IllegalArgumentException(s);
}
More dynamic is only possible via Reflection, but this would complicate the code, add a lot of potential error source, with only little benefit, considering that you need only to add one line of source code for adding support for another property in either of the examples above. After all, the set of defined properties gets fixed at compile time.
You could also have a single place where this comparators would be defined:
static enum MyObjectComparator {
ATTR1("attr1", Comparator.comparing(MyObject::getAttr1));
MyObjectComparator(String attrName, Comparator<MyObject> comparator) {
this.comparator = comparator;
this.attrName = attrName;
}
private final Comparator<MyObject> comparator;
private final String attrName;
private static MyObjectComparator[] allValues = MyObjectComparator.values();
public static Comparator<MyObject> findByValue(String value) {
return Arrays.stream(allValues)
.filter(x -> x.attrName.equalsIgnoreCase(value))
.map(x -> x.comparator)
.findAny()
.orElseThrow(RuntimeException::new);
}
}
And your usage would be:
public void sortListByAttr(List<MyObject> list, String attr) {
list.sort(MyObjectComparator.findByValue(attr));
}

How to cache an instrumented class with an instance forwarder?

The use case is to implement a dirty field tracker. For this I have an interface:
public interface Dirtyable {
String ID = "dirty";
Set<String> getDirty();
static <T> T wrap(final T delegate) {
return DirtyableInterceptor.wrap(delegate, ReflectionUtils::getPropertyName);
}
static <T> T wrap(final T delegate, final Function<Method, String> resolver) {
return DirtyableInterceptor.wrap(delegate, resolver);
}
}
In the interceptor class the wrapping method is:
static <T> T wrap(final T delegate, final Function<Method, String> resolver) {
requireNonNull(delegate, "Delegate must be non-null");
requireNonNull(resolver, "Resolver must be non-null");
final Try<Class<T>> delegateClassTry = Try.of(() -> getClassForType(delegate.getClass()));
return delegateClassTry.flatMapTry(delegateClass ->
dirtyableFor(delegate, delegateClass, resolver))
.mapTry(Class::newInstance)
.getOrElseThrow(t -> new IllegalStateException(
"Could not wrap dirtyable for " + delegate.getClass(), t));
}
The method dirtyableFor defines a ByteBuddy which forwards to a specific instance at each call. However, instrumenting at every invocation is a bit expensive so it caches the instrumented subclass from the given instance's class. For this I use the resilience4j library (a.k.a. javaslang-circuitbreaker).
private static <T> Try<Class<? extends T>> dirtyableFor(final T delegate,
final Class<T> clazz,
final Function<Method, String> resolver) {
long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
Try<Class<? extends T>> r = Try.of(() -> ofCheckedSupplier(() ->
new ByteBuddy().subclass(clazz)
.defineField(Dirtyable.ID, Set.class, Visibility.PRIVATE)
.method(nameMatches("getDirty"))
.intercept(reference(new HashSet<>()))
.implement(Dirtyable.class)
.method(not(isDeclaredBy(Object.class))
.and(not(isAbstract()))
.and(isPublic()))
.intercept(withDefaultConfiguration()
.withBinders(Pipe.Binder.install(Function.class))
.to(new DirtyableInterceptor(delegate, resolver)))
.make().load(clazz.getClassLoader())
.getLoaded())
.withCache(getCache())
.decorate()
.apply(clazz));
System.out.println("Instrumentation time: " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - start));
return r;
}
private static <T> Cache<Class<? super T>, Class<T>> getCache() {
final CachingProvider provider = Caching.getCachingProvider();
final CacheManager manager = provider.getCacheManager();
final javax.cache.Cache<Class<? super T>, Class<T>> cache =
manager.getCache(Dirtyable.ID);
final Cache<Class<? super T>, Class<T>> dirtyCache = Cache.of(cache);
dirtyCache.getEventStream().map(Object::toString).subscribe(logger::debug);
return dirtyCache;
}
From the logs, the intrumentation time drops from 70-100ms for a cache miss to 0-2ms for a cache hit.
For completeness here is the interceptor method:
#RuntimeType
#SuppressWarnings("unused")
public Object intercept(final #Origin Method method, final #This Dirtyable dirtyable,
final #Pipe Function<Object, Object> pipe) throws Throwable {
if (ReflectionUtils.isSetter(method)) {
final String property = resolver.apply(method);
dirtyable.getDirty().add(property);
logger.debug("Intercepted setter [{}], resolved property " +
"[{}] flagged as dirty.", method, property);
}
return pipe.apply(this.delegate);
}
This solution works well, except that the DirtyableInterceptor is always the same for cache hits, so the delegate instance is also the same.
Is it possible to bind a forwarder to a supplier of an instance so that intercepted methods would forward to it? How could this be done?
You can create a stateless interceptor by making your intercept method static. To access the object's state, define two fields on your subclass which you access using the #FieldValue annotations in your now static interceptor. Instead of using the FixedValue::reference instrumentation, you would also need to use the FieldAccessor implementation to read the value. You also need to define the fields using the defineField builder method.
You can set these fields either by:
Adding setter methods in your Dirtyable interface and intercepting them using the FieldAccessor implementation.
Defining an explicit constructor to which you supply the values. This also allows you to define the fields to be final. To implement the constructor, you first need to invoke a super constructor and then call the FieldAccessor several times to set the fields.
Doing so, you have created a fully stateless class that you can reuse but one that you need to initialze. Byte Buddy already offers a built-in TypeCache for easy reuse.

Resources