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

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • 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 622531
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T18:59:41+00:00 2026-05-13T18:59:41+00:00

I have some generic code which I cannot figure out how to legitimately prevent

  • 0

I have some generic code which I cannot figure out how to legitimately prevent getting warnings from; I am using @SuppressWarnings(“unchecked”) for the moment, since it seems that casting a generic type can’t be done without warnings.

How can I get rid of the annotation?

What I have is:

public MyObject(SharedContext<Object> ctx) {
    super(ctx); // set protected field 'context'
    ...
    context.set("Input Fields"  ,Collections.synchronizedMap(new TreeMap<String,Pair<String,Boolean>>(String.CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER)));
    context.set("Output Fields" ,Collections.synchronizedMap(new TreeMap<String,String>              (String.CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER)));
    context.set("Event Registry",new EventRegistry(log)                                                                              );
    }

@SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
protected void startup() {
    inputFields     =(Map<String,Pair<String,Boolean>>)context.get("Input Fields"  ,null);
    outputFields    =(Map<String,String>              )context.get("Output Fields" ,null);
    eventRegistry   =(EventRegistry                   )context.get("Event Registry",null);
    ...
    }

The protected variable context is type SharedContext<Object>.

Without the annotation the compiler gives warnings:

...\MyClass.java:94: warning: [unchecked] unchecked cast
found   : java.lang.Object
required: java.util.Map<java.lang.String,com.mycompany.Pair<java.lang.String,java.lang.Boolean>>
    inputFields     =(Map<String,Pair<String,Boolean>>)context.get("Input Fields"  ,null);
                                                                  ^
...\MyClass.java:95: warning: [unchecked] unchecked cast
found   : java.lang.Object
required: java.util.Map<java.lang.String,java.lang.String>
    outputFields    =(Map<String,String>              )context.get("Output Fields" ,null);
  • 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
    2026-05-13T18:59:41+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 6:59 pm

    After some further research I believe I have found a reasonable alternative, which at least limits the suppression annotation to just one global static utility method to do an unchecked cast.

    The self contained test program which follows should be clear enough:

    public class Generics
    {
    
    static public void main(String[] args) {
        Generics.test();
        }
    
    static private void test() {
        Map<String,Object> ctx=new TreeMap<String,Object>();
        Map<String,Object> map=new TreeMap<String,Object>();
        Map<String,Object> tst;
    
        ctx.put("Test",map);
        tst=uncheckedCast(ctx.get("Test"));
        }
    
    @SuppressWarnings({"unchecked"})
    static public <T> T uncheckedCast(Object obj) {
        return (T)obj;
        }
    
    }
    

    Another blog suggested an improvement to this utility method:

    @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") 
    public static <T, X extends T> X uncheckedCast(T o) {
        return (X) o;
        }
    

    forcing what is returned to be a subclass of the parameter passed in.

    Assuming I put uncheckedCast into public utility class GenUtil, my startup method in the question would have no (useless) warnings emitted and look like:

    protected void startup() {
        inputFields  =GenUtil.uncheckedCast(context.get("Input Fields"  ,null));
        outputFields =GenUtil.uncheckedCast(context.get("Output Fields" ,null));
        eventRegistry=GenUtil.uncheckedCast(context.get("Event Registry",null));
        ...
        }
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

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.