I\'m looking for a implementation of java.util.Queue or something in the Google collection who behave like a Queue, but also ensure that each element of the queue is unique.
I am a bit late to answer but I ended up solving a similar problem using an ArrayDeque and overriding the add method that I needed.
Deque<Long> myQueue = new ArrayDeque<Long>() {
@Override
public boolean add(Long e) { return !this.contains(e) && super.add(e);}
};
This doesn't exist as far as I know but would be fairly simple to implement using a LinkedList
in conjunction with a Set
:
/**
* Thread unsafe implementation of UniqueQueue.
*/
public class UniqueQueue<T> implements Queue<T> {
private final Queue<T> queue = new LinkedList<T>();
private final Set<T> set = new HashSet<T>();
public boolean add(T t) {
// Only add element to queue if the set does not contain the specified element.
if (set.add(t)) {
queue.add(t);
}
return true; // Must always return true as per API def.
}
public T remove() throws NoSuchElementException {
T ret = queue.remove();
set.remove(ret);
return ret;
}
// TODO: Implement other Queue methods.
}
Checking uniqueness of course has a cost (either in space or time). Seems like it might be interesting to work from something like a PriorityQueue which will maintain a heap sorted by Comparator of the elements. You might be able to leverage that to more efficiently (O(log n)) check existence without maintaining a side map.
If you do want to wrap a Queue with a uniqueness checker, I would strongly recommend using the Google Collections ForwardingQueue to build such a thing.
I'd be tempted to maintain a HashSet containing a key that uniquely identifies the items in the queue side-by-side with it. Then just check the HashSet to see if the item is in the queue before adding it. When you remove an item from the Queue, simply remove the key from the HashSet as well.
This is a very good question. There is no existing straightforward solution. I'll dig up some code I wrote a while back that attempted to do this, and come back and edit this answer.
EDIT: I'm back. Truly, if you don't need concurrency, you are better off maintaining a Queue and Set separately. For what I was doing, concurrency was a goal, but the best solution I could come up with given that constraint was problematic; basically, since it used a ConcurrentHashMap, the more you were removing the "head" element from the queue (a basic thing to do with a queue), the more unbalanced the hash table would become over time. I can still share this code with you, but I doubt you really want it.
EDIT: For the case where concurrency is required I gave this answer: Concurrent Set Queue
Unfortunately it doesn't exist. Since I needed such a Queue I have developed a Blocking Queue backed by a set, inspired by java.util.concurrent.LinkedBlockingQueue.
You can find it here :
https://github.com/bvanalderweireldt/concurrent-unique-queue
Example :
final BlockingQueue<Integer> queue = new ConcurrentSetBlockingQueue<>(1);
queue.offer(new Integer(1)); //True
queue.offer(new Integer(1)); //False
You can use it with Maven :
<dependency>
<groupId>com.hybhub</groupId>
<artifactId>concurrent-util</artifactId>
<version>0.1</version>
</dependency>