Eclipse给我一个如下形式的警告:

类型安全:未检查从对象转换到HashMap

这是从一个API调用,我无法控制返回对象:

HashMap<String, String> getItems(javax.servlet.http.HttpSession session) {
  HashMap<String, String> theHash = (HashMap<String, String>)session.getAttribute("attributeKey");
  return theHash;
}

如果可能的话,我希望避免使用Eclipse警告,因为理论上它们至少表明存在潜在的代码问题。不过,我还没有找到消除这个问题的好方法。我可以将所涉及的单行单独提取到一个方法中,并向该方法添加@SuppressWarnings(“unchecked”),从而限制忽略警告的代码块的影响。有更好的选择吗?我不想在Eclipse中关闭这些警告。

在我接触代码之前,它更简单,但仍然引起了警告:

HashMap getItems(javax.servlet.http.HttpSession session) {
  HashMap theHash = (HashMap)session.getAttribute("attributeKey");
  return theHash;
}

问题是在其他地方,当你试图使用散列时,你会得到警告:

HashMap items = getItems(session);
items.put("this", "that");

Type safety: The method put(Object, Object) belongs to the raw type HashMap.  References to generic type HashMap<K,V> should be parameterized.

当前回答

在这种特殊情况下,我不会将Maps直接存储到HttpSession中,而是将我自己的类的实例存储到HttpSession中,而该类的实例又包含一个Map(类的实现细节)。然后可以确定映射中的元素是正确的类型。

但是如果你想检查Map的内容类型是否正确,你可以使用这样的代码:

public static void main(String[] args) {
    Map<String, Integer> map = new HashMap<String, Integer>();
    map.put("a", 1);
    map.put("b", 2);
    Object obj = map;

    Map<String, Integer> ok = safeCastMap(obj, String.class, Integer.class);
    Map<String, String> error = safeCastMap(obj, String.class, String.class);
}

@SuppressWarnings({"unchecked"})
public static <K, V> Map<K, V> safeCastMap(Object map, Class<K> keyType, Class<V> valueType) {
    checkMap(map);
    checkMapContents(keyType, valueType, (Map<?, ?>) map);
    return (Map<K, V>) map;
}

private static void checkMap(Object map) {
    checkType(Map.class, map);
}

private static <K, V> void checkMapContents(Class<K> keyType, Class<V> valueType, Map<?, ?> map) {
    for (Map.Entry<?, ?> entry : map.entrySet()) {
        checkType(keyType, entry.getKey());
        checkType(valueType, entry.getValue());
    }
}

private static <K> void checkType(Class<K> expectedType, Object obj) {
    if (!expectedType.isInstance(obj)) {
        throw new IllegalArgumentException("Expected " + expectedType + " but was " + obj.getClass() + ": " + obj);
    }
}

其他回答

快速猜测一下你是否发布了你的代码,可以肯定地说,但是你可能做了一些类似的事情

HashMap<String, Object> test = new HashMap();

当你需要做的时候,哪个会产生警告

HashMap<String, Object> test = new HashMap<String, Object>();

也许值得一看

Java编程语言中的泛型

如果你不熟悉需要做什么。

在强制转换之前检查一下。

Object someObject = session.getAttribute("attributeKey");
if(someObject instanceof HashMap)
HashMap<String, String> theHash = (HashMap<String, String>)someObject;  

对于任何提问的人来说,收到你不确定类型的对象是很常见的。大量遗留的“SOA”实现传递各种对象,您不应该总是信任这些对象。(恐怖!)

EDIT修改了示例代码一次,以匹配海报的更新,在一些评论之后,我看到instanceof不能很好地使用泛型。然而,更改检查以验证外部对象似乎可以很好地使用命令行编译器。修订的例子现在发布。

在Eclipse首选项中,转到Java->编译器->错误/警告->泛型类型,并选中“忽略不可避免的泛型类型问题”复选框。

这满足了问题的意图,即。

我希望避免Eclipse警告……

如果不是精神。

计算机科学中的几乎每一个问题都可以通过添加一层间接方法来解决。

因此,引入一个非泛型对象,它的级别高于Map。如果没有上下文,它看起来不会很有说服力,但无论如何:

public final class Items implements java.io.Serializable {
    private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
    private Map<String,String> map;
    public Items(Map<String,String> map) {
        this.map = New.immutableMap(map);
    }
    public Map<String,String> getMap() {
        return map;
    }
    @Override public String toString() {
        return map.toString();
    }
}

public final class New {
    public static <K,V> Map<K,V> immutableMap(
        Map<? extends K, ? extends V> original
    ) {
        // ... optimise as you wish...
        return Collections.unmodifiableMap(
            new HashMap<String,String>(original)
        );
    }
}

static Map<String, String> getItems(HttpSession session) {
    Items items = (Items)
        session.getAttribute("attributeKey");
    return items.getMap();
}

*除了过多的间接层次。

Two ways, one which avoids the tag completely, the other using a naughty but nice utility method. The problem is pre-genericised Collections... I believe the rule of thumb is: "cast objects one thing at a time" - what this means when trying to use raw classes in a genericised world is that because you don't know what is in this Map<?, ?> (and indeed the JVM might even find that it isn't even a Map!), it obvious when you think about it that you can't cast it. If you had a Map<String, ?> map2 then HashSet<String> keys = (HashSet<String>)map2.keySet() does not give you a warning, despite this being an "act of faith" for the compiler (because it might turn out to be a TreeSet)... but it is only a single act of faith. PS to the objection that iterating as in my first way "is boring" and "takes time", the answer is "no pain no gain": a genericised collection is guaranteed to contain Map.Entry<String, String>s, and nothing else. You have to pay for this guarantee. When using generics systematically this payment, beautifully, takes the form of coding compliance, not machine time! One school of thought might say that you should set Eclipse's settings to make such unchecked casts errors, rather than warnings. In that case you would have to use my first way.

package scratchpad;

import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.Iterator;
import java.util.Map;
import java.util.Vector;

public class YellowMouse {

    // First way

    Map<String, String> getHashMapStudiouslyAvoidingSuppressTag(HttpSession session) {
      Map<?, ?> theHash = (Map<?, ?>)session.getAttribute("attributeKey");

      Map<String, String> yellowMouse = new HashMap<String, String>();
      for( Map.Entry<?, ?> entry : theHash.entrySet() ){
        yellowMouse.put( (String)entry.getKey(), (String)entry.getValue() );
      }

      return yellowMouse;
    }


    // Second way

    Map<String, String> getHashMapUsingNaughtyButNiceUtilityMethod(HttpSession session) {
      return uncheckedCast( session.getAttribute("attributeKey") );
    }


    // NB this is a utility method which should be kept in your utility library. If you do that it will
    // be the *only* time in your entire life that you will have to use this particular tag!!

    @SuppressWarnings({ "unchecked" })
    public static synchronized <T> T uncheckedCast(Object obj) {
        return (T) obj;
    }


}