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 606349
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T17:14:42+00:00 2026-05-13T17:14:42+00:00

I saw an example like this in a text and wasn’t sure why they

  • 0

I saw an example like this in a text and wasn’t sure why they did it this way. Let’s say you’re getting a bunch of Apple objects from a database:

List<Apple> appleList = (List<Apple>) db.getApples()

Why would you cast to a List<Apple> instead of one of the concrete List types (ArrayList, Vector or LinkedList)?

  • 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
    2026-05-13T17:14:42+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 5:14 pm

    This wiki article on the Liskov Substitution Principle and the Interface Segregation Principle may help you understand why you should program to interfaces.

    When working across domains which is common in EE development, you many times don’t care what kind of Collection is being used. You more often than not just want to retrieve something from it, iterate over it or remove something. None of these require knowing what kind of implementation you are dealing with. It will also make it easy to switch out the underlying implementation. For instance, let’s say that I am working on a project and load a list of items from a database into an ArrayList. Elsewhere in the code I am iterating through this list:

    class DBUtil {
        public static ArrayList<Item> getMeAllOfMyItems() {
             return items; // load from database whatever...
        }
    }
    

    … meanwhile …

    ArrayList<Item> items = DBUtil.getMeAllOfMyItems();
    for (int i = 0; i < items.size(); i++) {
        // do something with item
    }
    

    Now let’s say that I decide to use a Linked List instead. I would have to change the method that loaded everything from the database, as well as the code I was using to iterate through it:

    class DBUtil {
        public static LinkedList<Item> getMeAllOfMyItems() {
             return items; // load from database whatever...
        }
    }
    

    … meanwhile …

    LinkedList<Item> items = DBUtil.getMeAllOfMyItems();
    for (int i = 0; i < items.size(); i++) {
        // do something with item
    }
    

    That was two changes. If I had written it originally as:

    class DBUtil {
        public static List<Item> getMeAllOfMyItems() {
             return items; // load from database whatever...
        }
    }
    

    … meanwhile …

    List<Item> items = DBUtil.getMeAllOfMyItems();
    for (int i = 0; i < items.size(); i++) {
        // do something with item
    }
    

    I would only had to change one method, the method where I am returning the items from the database.

    Even better would be to change the way I am iterating over the items to use the for each style:

    class DBUtil {
        public static List<Item> getMeAllOfMyItems() {
             return items; // load from database whatever...
        }
    }
    

    … meanwhile …

    List<Item> items = DBUtil.getMeAllOfMyItems();
    for (Item i : items) {
        // do something with item
    }
    

    Now if I wanted, I could even change out even more of the implementation and as long as whatever I use implements Iterable, I don’t even really care what type of Collection the underlying system is using.

    You should strive to make things as generic as possible with the intent that you don’t want to have to change 3 or 4 files because of a small change elsewhere.

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

Sidebar

Related Questions

No related questions found

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.