Java question

I need to be able to associate one or more values with a key, and so far I've looked at maps, sets, treemaps, and vectors, but none of them can do what I need to do. Could someone point me in the right direction (besides "LOL USE PYTON LULZ" or "Kill yourself").

Read SICP.

HashMap<TKey, List<TValue>> you_are_an_idiot;

Wrong.

HashMap<TKey, List<TValue> >

Notice what is missing in yours?

>>4
This isn't C++. Java knows how to tell the difference between a bitwise shift and nested generics.

>>4
lol for C++ syntax whore

>>1
Kill yourself, then use Python.

Yeh

declaration:
Map<K,Collection<TValue>> map = new HashMap<TKey,Collection<TValue>>();

helper method so you don't need to care about creating the collections:
private <K,V> Collection<V> mapCollection(Map<K,Collection<V>> map, K key) {
  Collection<V> c = map.get(key);
  if(c == null) map.put(key,c = new ArrayList<V>());
  return c;
}

java *fapfafap*

The big point is, why are the C++ and Java morons such losers? They make an endless chain of mistakes.

They lack proper dynamic typing in their languages, and to fix this fuckup, they introduce even more fuckup, language bloat, and enterprise hell.

Then they go defining stupid syntaxes and operators such as <...>. Who the hell uses <...> in a language that already uses < and >? How can you tell in >>9 if Map<K means to evaluate whether object Map is lesser than object K? Or is it that the language is so limited that you can't attempt to compare two any objects, or somethings are not even objects? Way to lose, motherfuckers.

If you want to introduce this generic shit because your type system is so big a failure, better define macros. And for that, you already have all the syntax you need. You can use:

defmacro(
...
);

and not bloat the language. Stop fixing shitty decisions with even shittier decisions.

>>10
any two objects, or some things are not even objects?
Fixing, I was writing too fast out of EXPERT LISPER RAGE.

>>10

No, if you want this generic shit with an static type system, do it the haskell way. it's better.
that said, dynamic typing + defmacro ftw

How can you tell in >>9 if Map<K means to evaluate whether object Map is lesser than object K?

by not being retarded

How can you tell in >>9 if Map<K means to evaluate whether object Map is lesser than object K?
Because the syntax distinguishes between declarations and expressions.

>>14
the syntax distinguishes between declarations and expressions
Then this syntax is a FAILURE OF EPIC PROPORTIONS.

>>14
That reeks of Basic's "If n = 3 Then n = 4" shite.

lol @ modal syntax

Lain.

20 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-17 1:40

Erika once told me that Xarn is a bad boyfriend