I use comparable interface all the time to provided natural ordering for my class through collection.sort.
Basically if I have a person class, I will get it to imple
You always use extends with generics wildcards, even if the type parameter implements an interface.
If you look at a class that implements Comparable, you'll see that it actually (should) implement Comparable<T>, where T is the class itself.
It makes sense if you think about the type paramter passed to the Comparable interface and how it's used in the compareTo() method.
As PM 77-1 has eloquently pointed out, the super keyword allows for either the class, T, or one of its parents to implement Comparable.
Actually, it means that T can implement Comparable<? super T>, not just Comparable<T>.
For example, it means that a Student class can implement Comparable<Person>, where Student is a subclass of Person:
public class Person {}
public class Student extends Person implements Comparable<Person> {
@Override public int compareTo(Person that) {
// ...
}
}
In this case, a List can be sorted by Collections.sort() but only based on Person's properties, because you pass the Student instance into compareTo() as a Person (unless you downcast it, of course).
In practice however, you'll never see a Student class implement Comparable<Person>. That's because Person will probably have implemented Comparable<Person>, and Student inherits it implementation. The end result is the same however: you can pass a List<Student> to Collections.sort() and have it sorted on Person's properties.
The difference between Comparable<T> and Comparable<? super T> is more obvious in the overloaded version of Collections.sort() that takes a Comparator<? super T>:
class ByAgeAscending implements Comparator<Person> {
@Override public int compare(Person a, Person b) {
return a.getAge() < b.getAge();
}
}
List<Student> students = getSomeStudents();
Collections.sort(students, new ByAgeAscending());