[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COLLECTIONS-663?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16968061#comment-16968061
]
Chen edited comment on COLLECTIONS-663 at 11/6/19 7:07 AM:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Hello. [~chris333]
Thank you for your response.
I think the representation of Multimap is \{1: A, 1: B, 2: C}. So when A and B
are deleted, only \{2: C} is left. And asMap() method returns a map in the
form of \{1：[A, B], 2：[C]}. In this map, \{1：[], 2:[C]} is left when A and B
are deleted.
If you agree with what I say above, the cause of your problem is not
AbstractMultiMap ValueIterator.remove().
The reason is as follow:
{code:java}
// AbstractMultiValuedMap AsMap entrySet() AsMapEntrySet AsMapEntrySetIterator
next()
class AsMapEntrySetIterator extends
AbstractIteratorDecorator<Map.Entry<K, Collection<V>>> {
AsMapEntrySetIterator(final Iterator<Map.Entry<K, Collection<V>>>
iterator) {
super(iterator);
}
@Override
public Map.Entry<K, Collection<V>> next() {
final Map.Entry<K, Collection<V>> entry = super.next();
final K key = entry.getKey();
final Collection<V> value = entry.getValue();
return new UnmodifiableMapEntry<>(key, value);
//return new UnmodifiableMapEntry<>(key,
wrappedCollection(key));
}
}
{code}
I think wrappedCollection(key) should not be used。 It willl show as \{1: A, 1:
B, 2: C} when wrappedCollection(key) is used, the asMap() method does not make
sense.
And this modification will also avoid your problem. You also can traverse the
MultiMap by mapIterator() method.
Thank you for your listening!
was (Author: guoping1):
Hello. [~chris333]
Thank you for your response.
I think the representation of Multimap is \{1: A, 1: B, 2: C}. So when A and B
are deleted, only \{2: C} is left. And asMap() method returns a map in the
form of {1：[A, B], 2：[C]}. In this map, {1：[], 2:[C]} is left when A and B are
deleted.
If you agree with what I say above, the cause of your problem is not
AbstractMultiMap ValueIterator.remove().
The reason is as follow:
{code:java}
// AbstractMultiValuedMap AsMap entrySet() AsMapEntrySet AsMapEntrySetIterator
next()
class AsMapEntrySetIterator extends
AbstractIteratorDecorator<Map.Entry<K, Collection<V>>> {
AsMapEntrySetIterator(final Iterator<Map.Entry<K, Collection<V>>>
iterator) {
super(iterator);
}
@Override
public Map.Entry<K, Collection<V>> next() {
final Map.Entry<K, Collection<V>> entry = super.next();
final K key = entry.getKey();
final Collection<V> value = entry.getValue();
return new UnmodifiableMapEntry<>(key, value);
//return new UnmodifiableMapEntry<>(key,
wrappedCollection(key));
}
}
{code}
I think wrappedCollection(key) should not be used。 It willl show as \{1: A, 1:
B, 2: C} when wrappedCollection(key) is used, the asMap() method does not make
sense.
And this modification will also avoid your problem. You also can traverse the
MultiMap by mapIterator() method.
Thank you for your listening!
> Unexpected ConcurrentModificationException when altering Collection of a
> MultiValuedMap
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: COLLECTIONS-663
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COLLECTIONS-663
> Project: Commons Collections
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Christophe Schmaltz
> Assignee: Bruno P. Kinoshita
> Priority: Trivial
>
> Testcase:
> {code} @Test
> public void test() {
> MultiValuedMap<Integer, Integer> multiMap = new
> HashSetValuedHashMap<>();
> multiMap.put(1, 10);
> multiMap.put(2, 20);
> for (Collection<Integer> innerCollection :
> multiMap.asMap().values()) {
> for (Iterator<Integer> iterator =
> innerCollection.iterator(); iterator.hasNext();) {
> Integer i = iterator.next();
> iterator.remove(); // only the innerCollection
> is altered
> }
> // innerCollection.add(6); // adding stuff back should
> also work...
> }
> }{code}
> This test unexpectedly throws a ConcurrentModificationException.
> The issue is that when calling {{iterator.remove()}} the
> {{AbstractMultiValuedMap.ValuesIterator}} detects that the Collection is
> empty and calls {{AbstractMultiValuedMap.this.remove(key);}}.
> It may be better if the iterator of the inner collection had a reference on
> the iterator if the outer map and called {{containerIterator.remove()}}
> instead.
> *Note:* this solution would again present issues if the user tries to add new
> elements in this now empty collection (which was removed from the parent).
> In the current state, it is quite unclear why an exception is thrown, without
> debugging the code.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
