How can I initialise a static Map?

Viewed 977048

How would you initialise a static Map in Java?

Method one: static initialiser
Method two: instance initialiser (anonymous subclass) or some other method?

What are the pros and cons of each?

Here is an example illustrating the two methods:

import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.Map;

public class Test {
    private static final Map<Integer, String> myMap = new HashMap<>();
    static {
        myMap.put(1, "one");
        myMap.put(2, "two");
    }

    private static final Map<Integer, String> myMap2 = new HashMap<>(){
        {
            put(1, "one");
            put(2, "two");
        }
    };
}
43 Answers

The instance initialiser is just syntactic sugar in this case, right? I don't see why you need an extra anonymous class just to initialize. And it won't work if the class being created is final.

You can create an immutable map using a static initialiser too:

public class Test {
    private static final Map<Integer, String> myMap;
    static {
        Map<Integer, String> aMap = ....;
        aMap.put(1, "one");
        aMap.put(2, "two");
        myMap = Collections.unmodifiableMap(aMap);
    }
}

I would use:

public class Test {
    private static final Map<Integer, String> MY_MAP = createMap();

    private static Map<Integer, String> createMap() {
        Map<Integer, String> result = new HashMap<>();
        result.put(1, "one");
        result.put(2, "two");
        return Collections.unmodifiableMap(result);
    }
}
  1. it avoids an anonymous class, which I personally consider to be a bad style, and avoid
  2. it makes the creation of map more explicit
  3. it makes map unmodifiable
  4. as MY_MAP is constant, I would name it like constant

Java 5 provides this more compact syntax:

static final Map<String , String> FLAVORS = new HashMap<String , String>() {{
    put("Up",    "Down");
    put("Charm", "Strange");
    put("Top",   "Bottom");
}};

One advantage to the second method is that you can wrap it with Collections.unmodifiableMap() to guarantee that nothing is going to update the collection later:

private static final Map<Integer, String> CONSTANT_MAP = 
    Collections.unmodifiableMap(new HashMap<Integer, String>() {{ 
        put(1, "one");
        put(2, "two");
    }});

 // later on...

 CONSTANT_MAP.put(3, "three"); // going to throw an exception!

I would never create an anonymous subclass in this situation. Static initializers work equally well, if you would like to make the map unmodifiable for example:

private static final Map<Integer, String> MY_MAP;
static
{
    Map<Integer, String>tempMap = new HashMap<Integer, String>();
    tempMap.put(1, "one");
    tempMap.put(2, "two");
    MY_MAP = Collections.unmodifiableMap(tempMap);
}

Maybe it's interesting to check out Google Collections, e.g. the videos that they have on their page. They provide various ways to initialize maps and sets, and provide immutable collections as well.

Update: This library is now named Guava.

I could strongly suggest the "double brace initialization" style over static block style.

Someone may comment that they don't like anonymous class, overhead, performance, etc.

But that I more consider is the code readability and maintainability. In this point of view, I stand a double brace is a better code style rather then static method.

  1. The elements are nested and inline.
  2. It is more OO, not procedural.
  3. the performance impact is really small and could be ignored.
  4. Better IDE outline support (rather then many anonymous static{} block)
  5. You saved few lines of comment to bring them relationship.
  6. Prevent possible element leak/instance lead of uninitialized object from exception and bytecode optimizer.
  7. No worry about the order of execution of static block.

In addition, it you aware the GC of the anonymous class, you can always convert it to a normal HashMap by using new HashMap(Map map).

You can do this until you faced another problem. If you do, you should use complete another coding style (e.g. no static, factory class) for it.

If you want unmodifiable map, finally java 9 added a cool factory method of to Map interface. Similar method is added to Set, List as well.

Map<String, String> unmodifiableMap = Map.of("key1", "value1", "key2", "value2");

The anonymous class you're creating works well. However you should be aware that this is an inner class and as such, it'll contain a reference to the surrounding class instance. So you'll find you can't do certain things with it (using XStream for one). You'll get some very strange errors.

Having said that, so long as you're aware then this approach is fine. I use it most of the time for initialising all sorts of collections in a concise fashion.

EDIT: Pointed out correctly in the comments that this is a static class. Obviously I didn't read this closely enough. However my comments do still apply to anonymous inner classes.

Well... I like enums ;)

enum MyEnum {
    ONE   (1, "one"),
    TWO   (2, "two"),
    THREE (3, "three");

    int value;
    String name;

    MyEnum(int value, String name) {
        this.value = value;
        this.name = name;
    }

    static final Map<Integer, String> MAP = Stream.of( values() )
            .collect( Collectors.toMap( e -> e.value, e -> e.name ) );
}

Note: This answer actually belongs to question How to directly initialize a HashMap (in a literal way)? but since that was marked as duplicate of this one at time of this writing...


Prior to Java 9 with its Map.of() (which is also limited to 10 mappings) you can extend a Map implementation of your choice, e.g.:

public class InitHashMap<K, V> extends HashMap<K, V>

re-implement HashMap's constructors:

public InitHashMap() {
    super();
}

public InitHashMap( int initialCapacity, float loadFactor ) {
    super( initialCapacity, loadFactor );
}

public InitHashMap( int initialCapacity ) {
    super( initialCapacity );
}

public InitHashMap( Map<? extends K, ? extends V> map ) {
    super( map );
}

and add an additional constructor that's inspired by Aerthel's answer but is generic by using Object... and <K, V> types:

public InitHashMap( final Object... keyValuePairs ) {

    if ( keyValuePairs.length % 2 != 0 )
        throw new IllegalArgumentException( "Uneven number of arguments." );

    K key = null;
    int i = -1;

    for ( final Object keyOrValue : keyValuePairs )
        switch ( ++i % 2 ) {
            case 0:  // key
                if ( keyOrValue == null )
                    throw new IllegalArgumentException( "Key[" + (i >>> 1) + "] is <null>." );
                key = (K) keyOrValue;
                continue;
            case 1:  // value
                put( key, (V) keyOrValue );
        }
}

Run

public static void main( final String[] args ) {

    final Map<Integer, String> map = new InitHashMap<>( 1, "First", 2, "Second", 3, "Third" );
    System.out.println( map );
}

Output

{1=First, 2=Second, 3=Third}

You also can extend the Map interface likewise:

public interface InitMap<K, V> extends Map<K, V> {

    static <K, V> Map<K, V> of( final Object... keyValuePairs ) {

        if ( keyValuePairs.length % 2 != 0 )
            throw new IllegalArgumentException( "Uneven number of arguments." );

        final Map<K, V> map = new HashMap<>( keyValuePairs.length >>> 1, .75f );
        K key = null;
        int i = -1;

        for ( final Object keyOrValue : keyValuePairs )
            switch ( ++i % 2 ) {
                case 0: // key
                    if ( keyOrValue == null )
                        throw new IllegalArgumentException( "Key[" + (i >>> 1) + "] is <null>." );
                    key = (K) keyOrValue;
                    continue;
                case 1: // value
                    map.put( key, (V) keyOrValue );
            }
        return map;
    }
}

Run

public static void main( final String[] args ) {

    System.out.println( InitMap.of( 1, "First", 2, "Second", 3, "Third" ) );
}

Output

{1=First, 2=Second, 3=Third}

This one uses Apache commons-lang which will most likely be on your class path already:

Map<String, String> collect = Stream.of(
        Pair.of("hello", "world"),
        Pair.of("abc", "123"),
        Pair.of("java", "eight")
).collect(Collectors.toMap(Pair::getKey, Pair::getValue));

The second method could invoke protected methods if needed. This can be useful for initializing classes which are immutable after construction.

I like the anonymous class syntax; it's just less code. However, one major con I have found is that you won't be able to serialize that object via remoting. You will get an exception about not being able to find the anonymous class on the remote side.

I've done something a bit different. Not the best, but it works for me. Maybe it could be "genericized".

private static final Object[][] ENTRIES =
{
  {new Integer(1), "one"},
  {new Integer(2), "two"},
};
private static final Map myMap = newMap(ENTRIES);

private static Map newMap(Object[][] entries)
{
  Map map = new HashMap();

  for (int x = 0; x < entries.length; x++)
  {
    Object[] entry = entries[x];

    map.put(entry[0], entry[1]);
  }

  return map;
}

Java 8 with streams:

    private static final Map<String, TemplateOpts> templates = new HashMap<>();

    static {
        Arrays.stream(new String[][]{
                {CUSTOMER_CSV, "Plantilla cliente", "csv"}
        }).forEach(f -> templates.put(f[0], new TemplateOpts(f[1], f[2])));
    }

It can be also a Object[][] to put anything inside and map it in the forEach loop

Related