Vavr, Collections, and Java Stream API Collectors

Vavr is now a must-have for every modern Java 8+ project. It encourages writing code in a functional manner by providing a new persistent Collections API along with a set of new Functional Interfaces and monadic tools like Option, Try, Either, etc.

You can read more about it here.

Vavr’s Persistent Collections API

To provide useable immutable data structures, the whole Collections API needed to be redesigned from scratch.

The standard java.util.Collection interface contains methods that discourage immutability such as:

boolean add(E e);
boolean remove(Object o);
boolean addAll(Collection<? extends E> c);
boolean removeAll(Collection<?> c);

One might think that the problem is that those methods allow modifications of the particular collection instance, but this is not entirely true – with immutable data structures, each mutating operation needs to derive a new collection from the existing one. Simply put, each of those methods should be able to return a new instance of the collection.

Here, the whole collections hierarchy is restricted to returning boolean or void from mutating methods – which makes them suitable only for mutable implementations.

Of course, immutable implementations of java.util.Collection exist, but above-mentioned methods are simply forbidden. That’s how it looks like in the com.google.common.collect.ImmutableList:

/**
 * Guaranteed to throw an exception and leave the list unmodified.
 *
 * @throws UnsupportedOperationException always
 * @deprecated Unsupported operation.
 */
@Deprecated
@Override
public final void add(int index, E element) {
  throw new UnsupportedOperationException();
}

And this is far from perfect – even the simplest add() operation becomes a ceremony:

ImmutableList<Integer> original = ImmutableList.of(1);

List<Integer> modified = new ImmutableList.Builder<Integer>()
  .addAll(original)
  .add(2)
  .build();

A major redesign made it possible to interact with immutable collections more naturally and add some new exciting features:

import io.vavr.collection.List;
// ...

List<Integer> original = List.of(1);
List<Integer> modified = original.append(2);

modified.dropWhile(i -> i < 42);
modified.combinations();
modified.foldLeft(0 , Integer::sum)

Collecting Vavr’s Collections

One of the key features of the Java Stream API was the collect() API that made it possible to take elements from Stream and apply the provided strategy to them – in most cases that would be simply placing all elements in some collection.

Vavr’s collections have a method that provides the similar(but limited) functionality but it’s not being used often because almost all operations that were available only using Stream API, are available on the collection level in Vavr.

But… one of the method signatures of Vavr’s collect() is especially intriguing:

<R, A> R collect(java.util.stream.Collector<? super T, A, R> collector)

As you can see, Vavr’s collections are fully compatible with Stream API Collectors and we can use our favourite Collectors easily:

list.collect(Collectors.toList());
list.collect(Collectors.groupingBy(Integer::byteValue));

That might not be super useful for everyday use-cases because the most common operations are accessible without using Collectors but it’s comforting to know that Vavr’s functionality is a superset of Stream API’s (at least in terms of collect() semantics)

Collecting Everything

The interesting realization happens when we decide to investigate the type hierarchy in Vavr:

source: http://www.vavr.io/vavr-docs/

We can notice here that the Value resides on top collections hierarchy and this is where the collect() method mentioned above is defined.

If we look closer, it’s clear that classes like Option, Try, Either, Future, Lazy also implement the Value interface. The reasoning behind this is that they are all essentially containers for values – containers that can hold max up to one element.  

This makes them compatible with Stream API Collectors, as well:

Option.of(42)
  .collect(Collectors.toList());

Try.of(() -> URI.create("4comprehension.com"))
  .collect(Collectors.partitioningBy(URI::isAbsolute));

Summary

The redesign of the Collections API allowed the introduction of cool new methods, as well as achieving full interoperability with Java Stream API Collectors – which can also be applied to Vavr’s functional control structures like Option, Try, Either, Future, or Lazy.

The examples above use:

<dependency>
    <groupId>io.vavr</groupId>
    <artifactId>vavr-test</artifactId>
    <version>0.9.0</version>
</dependency>
You May Also Like

mount.ntfs high cpu ubuntu

My computer suffers from sudden and continous hard drive load strokes. Sometimes it lasts for a few minutes and hence work is impossible because everything goes very slow.I'm trying to locate the cause because it makes me nervous :)Today I found one of...

Private fields and methods are not private in groovy

I used to code in Java before I met groovy. Like most of you, groovy attracted me with many enhancements. This was to my surprise to discover that method visibility in groovy is handled different than Java!

Consider this example:

class Person {
private String name
public String surname

private Person() {}

private String signature() { "${name?.substring(0, 1)}. $surname" }

public String toString() { "I am $name $surname" }
}

How is this class interpreted with Java?

  1. Person has private constructor that cannot be accessed
  2. Field "name" is private and cannot be accessed
  3. Method signature() is private and cannot be accessed

Let's see how groovy interpretes Person:

public static void main(String[] args) {
def person = new Person() // constructor is private - compilation error in Java
println(person.toString())

person.@name = 'Mike' // access name field directly - compilation error in Java
println(person.toString())

person.name = 'John' // there is a setter generated by groovy
println(person.toString())

person.@surname = 'Foo' // access surname field directly
println(person.toString())

person.surname = 'Bar' // access auto-generated setter
println(person.toString())

println(person.signature()) // call private method - compilation error in Java
}

I was really astonished by its output:

I am null null
I am Mike null
I am John null
I am John Foo
I am John Bar
J. Bar

As you can see, groovy does not follow visibility directives at all! It treats them as non-existing. Code compiles and executes fine. It's contrary to Java. In Java this code has several errors, pointed out in comments.

I've searched a bit on this topic and it seems that this behaviour is known since version 1.1 and there is a bug report on that: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GROOVY-1875. It is not resolved even with groovy 2 release. As Tim Yates mentioned in this Stackoverflow question: "It's not clear if it is a bug or by design". Groovy treats visibility keywords as a hint for a programmer.

I need to keep that lesson in mind next time I want to make some field or method private!