Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 5969903
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 22, 20262026-05-22T20:17:50+00:00 2026-05-22T20:17:50+00:00

I am having a specific problem implementing a parametrised class Parameter, but this is

  • 0

I am having a specific problem implementing a parametrised class Parameter, but this is something I have come across before with generics, so a general solution would be good..

The class Parameter stores a value of one of a strict number of classes:

public class Parameter<T> {

/*
 * Specify what types of parameter are valid
 */
private static final Set<Class<?>> VALID_TYPES;
static {
    Set<Class<?>> set = new HashSet<Class<?>>();

    set.add( Integer.class );
    set.add( Float.class );
    set.add( Boolean.class );
    set.add( String.class );

    VALID_TYPES = Collections.unmodifiableSet(set);
}

private T value;

public Parameter(T initialValue) throws IllegalArgumentException {

    // Parameter validity check
    if (!VALID_TYPES.contains(initialValue.getClass())) {
        throw new IllegalArgumentException(
                initialValue.getClass() + " is not a valid parameter type");
    }

    value = initialValue;
}

    public T get() { return value; }

    public void set(T value) {
        this.value = value;
    }
}

This is all fine, until I try and store instances of Parameter in a collection. For example:

Parameter<Integer> p = new Parameter<Integer>(3); 
int value = (Integer)p.get();
p.set(2); // Fine

ArrayList<Parameter<?>> ps = new ArrayList<Parameter<?>>();
ps.add(p);
value = (Integer)(ps.get(0).get());

ps.get(0).set(4); // Does not compile due to type erasure

What would others do in this situation to get round this?

Thanks

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-22T20:17:50+00:00Added an answer on May 22, 2026 at 8:17 pm

    Well, you can’t directly work around this.. But perhaps you could remember the class of the initial value?

    class Parameter<T> {
        // ...
        private T value;
        private final Class<?> klass;
    
        public Parameter(T initialValue) throws IllegalArgumentException {
            if (!VALID_TYPES.contains(initialValue.getClass()))
                throw new IllegalArgumentException(...);
            value = initialValue;
            klass = initialValue.getClass();
        }
    
        @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
        public void set(Object value) {
            if (value != null && value.getClass() != klass)
                throw new IllegalArgumentException(...);
            this.value = (T)value;
        }
    

    However, you will lose compile-time type checks on set()..

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I am having the problem that I cannot select a specific XML node which
Having a heckuva time with this one, though I feel I'm missing something obvious.
I'm having a little trouble figuring out exactly how const applies in a specific
How can I open a cmd window in a specific location without having to
How can I check file permissions , without having to run operating system specific
Having a problem getting a TreeView control to display node images. The code below
Having been a PHP developer on LAMP servers for quite a while, is there
Having worked with Classic ASP for about 2 years now by creating a few
Having read the threads Is SqlCommand.Dispose enough? and Closing and Disposing a WCF Service
Having to upgrade a database schema makes installing a new release of software a

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.