Reputation: 229581
We all know you can't do the following because of ConcurrentModificationException
:
for (Object i : l) {
if (condition(i)) {
l.remove(i);
}
}
But this apparently works sometimes, but not always. Here's some specific code:
public static void main(String[] args) {
Collection<Integer> l = new ArrayList<>();
for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i) {
l.add(4);
l.add(5);
l.add(6);
}
for (int i : l) {
if (i == 5) {
l.remove(i);
}
}
System.out.println(l);
}
This, of course, results in:
Exception in thread "main" java.util.ConcurrentModificationException
Even though multiple threads aren't doing it. Anyway.
What's the best solution to this problem? How can I remove an item from the collection in a loop without throwing this exception?
I'm also using an arbitrary Collection
here, not necessarily an ArrayList
, so you can't rely on get
.
Upvotes: 1303
Views: 525975
Reputation: 128
Iterator is not foolproof and can also cause ConcurrentModificationException in some cases.
This will work if single thread is accessing list at a time.
val items = arrayListOf<String>()
val itemsToBeRemoved = arrayListOf<String>()
items.add("1")
items.add("2")
items.add("3")
items.forEach {
if(someCondition){
// item you want to be removed
itemsToBeRemoved.add(it)
}
}
itemsToBeRemoved.forEach {
// remove item
items.remove(it)
}
itemsToBeRemoved.clear()
You can use CopyOnWriteArrayList
if your list is access from mutliple threads. But remember it will cause performance issues if your list is changing frequently. CopyOnWriteArrayList
will perform better if your list is not updating frequently.
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 328913
With Java 8 you can use the new removeIf
method. Applied to your example:
Collection<Integer> coll = new ArrayList<>();
//populate
coll.removeIf(i -> i == 5);
A simple test as example:
@Test
public void testRemoveIfOneList() {
List<String> outer = new ArrayList<>();
outer.add("one");
outer.add("two");
outer.add("three");
outer.removeIf(o -> o.length() == 3);
assertEquals(1, outer.size());
}
It even works when you compare two lists and want to remove from both.
@Test
public void testRemoveIfTwoLists() {
List<String> outer = new ArrayList<>();
outer.add("one");
outer.add("two");
outer.add("three");
List<String> inner = new ArrayList<>();
inner.addAll(outer);
// first, it removes from inner, and if anything is removed, then removeIf() returns true,
// leading to removing from outer
outer.removeIf(o -> inner.removeIf(i -> i.equals(o)));
assertEquals(0, outer.size());
assertEquals(0, inner.size());
}
However, if one of the list has duplicates, make sure it's iterated in the inner loop, because for inner list, it will remove all elements meeting the criteria, but for outer list, when any element is removed, it will return immediately and stops checking.
This test will fail:
@Test
public void testRemoveIfTwoListsInnerHasDuplicates() {
List<String> outer = new ArrayList<>();
outer.add("one");
outer.add("one");
outer.add("two");
outer.add("two");
outer.add("three");
outer.add("three");
List<String> inner = new ArrayList<>();
inner.addAll(outer); // both have duplicates
// remove all elements from inner(executed twice), then remove from outer
// but only once! if anything is removed, it will return immediately!!
outer.removeIf(o -> inner.removeIf(i -> i.equals(o)));
assertEquals(0, inner.size()); // pass, inner all removed
assertEquals(0, outer.size()); // will fail, outer has size = 3
}
Upvotes: 244
Reputation: 2332
Iterators are not always helpful when another thread also modifies the collection. I had tried many ways but then realized traversing the collection manually is much safer (backward for removal):
for (i in myList.size-1 downTo 0) {
myList.getOrNull(i)?.also {
if (it == 5)
myList.remove(it)
}
}
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 1421
The best way (recommended) is use of java.util.concurrent
package. By
using this package you can easily avoid this exception. Refer
Modified Code:
public static void main(String[] args) {
Collection<Integer> l = new CopyOnWriteArrayList<Integer>();
for (int i=0; i < 10; ++i) {
l.add(new Integer(4));
l.add(new Integer(5));
l.add(new Integer(6));
}
for (Integer i : l) {
if (i.intValue() == 5) {
l.remove(i);
}
}
System.out.println(l);
}
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 34461
Java Concurrent Modification Exception
Iterator<String> iterator = list.iterator();
while (iterator.hasNext()) {
String value = iter.next()
if (value == "A") {
list.remove(it.next()); //throws ConcurrentModificationException
}
}
Solution: iterator remove()
method
Iterator<String> iterator = list.iterator();
while (iterator.hasNext()) {
String value = iter.next()
if (value == "A") {
it.remove()
}
}
synchronize
[About]Upvotes: 1
Reputation: 291
If using HashMap, in newer versions of Java (8+) you can select each of 3 options:
public class UserProfileEntity {
private String Code;
private String mobileNumber;
private LocalDateTime inputDT;
// getters and setters here
}
HashMap<String, UserProfileEntity> upMap = new HashMap<>();
// remove by value
upMap.values().removeIf(value -> !value.getCode().contains("0005"));
// remove by key
upMap.keySet().removeIf(key -> key.contentEquals("testUser"));
// remove by entry / key + value
upMap.entrySet().removeIf(entry -> (entry.getKey().endsWith("admin") || entry.getValue().getInputDT().isBefore(LocalDateTime.now().minusMinutes(3)));
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 3979
I ended up with this ConcurrentModificationException
, while iterating the list using stream().map()
method. However the for(:)
did not throw the exception while iterating and modifying the the list.
Here is code snippet , if its of help to anyone:
here I'm iterating on a ArrayList<BuildEntity>
, and modifying it using the list.remove(obj)
for(BuildEntity build : uniqueBuildEntities){
if(build!=null){
if(isBuildCrashedWithErrors(build)){
log.info("The following build crashed with errors , will not be persisted -> \n{}"
,build.getBuildUrl());
uniqueBuildEntities.remove(build);
if (uniqueBuildEntities.isEmpty()) return EMPTY_LIST;
}
}
}
if(uniqueBuildEntities.size()>0) {
dbEntries.addAll(uniqueBuildEntities);
}
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 686
You can use a while loop.
Iterator<Map.Entry<String, String>> iterator = map.entrySet().iterator();
while(iterator.hasNext()){
Map.Entry<String, String> entry = iterator.next();
if(entry.getKey().equals("test")) {
iterator.remove();
}
}
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 6605
Another way is to use a copy of your arrayList just for iteration:
List<Object> l = ...
List<Object> iterationList = ImmutableList.copyOf(l);
for (Object curr : iterationList) {
if (condition(curr)) {
l.remove(curr);
}
}
Upvotes: 4
Reputation: 226
Now, You can remove with the following code
l.removeIf(current -> current == 5);
Upvotes: 2
Reputation: 434
you can also use Recursion
Recursion in java is a process in which a method calls itself continuously. A method in java that calls itself is called recursive method.
Upvotes: -2
Reputation: 4137
With a traditional for loop
ArrayList<String> myArray = new ArrayList<>();
for (int i = 0; i < myArray.size(); ) {
String text = myArray.get(i);
if (someCondition(text))
myArray.remove(i);
else
i++;
}
Upvotes: 10
Reputation: 13828
You can either use the iterator directly like you mentioned, or else keep a second collection and add each item you want to remove to the new collection, then removeAll at the end. This allows you to keep using the type-safety of the for-each loop at the cost of increased memory use and cpu time (shouldn't be a huge problem unless you have really, really big lists or a really old computer)
public static void main(String[] args)
{
Collection<Integer> l = new ArrayList<Integer>();
Collection<Integer> itemsToRemove = new ArrayList<>();
for (int i=0; i < 10; i++) {
l.add(Integer.of(4));
l.add(Integer.of(5));
l.add(Integer.of(6));
}
for (Integer i : l)
{
if (i.intValue() == 5) {
itemsToRemove.add(i);
}
}
l.removeAll(itemsToRemove);
System.out.println(l);
}
Upvotes: 28
Reputation: 6688
People are asserting one can't remove from a Collection being iterated by a foreach loop. I just wanted to point out that is technically incorrect and describe exactly (I know the OP's question is so advanced as to obviate knowing this) the code behind that assumption:
for (TouchableObj obj : untouchedSet) { // <--- This is where ConcurrentModificationException strikes
if (obj.isTouched()) {
untouchedSet.remove(obj);
touchedSt.add(obj);
break; // this is key to avoiding returning to the foreach
}
}
It isn't that you can't remove from the iterated Colletion
rather that you can't then continue iteration once you do. Hence the break
in the code above.
Apologies if this answer is a somewhat specialist use-case and more suited to the original thread I arrived here from, that one is marked as a duplicate (despite this thread appearing more nuanced) of this and locked.
Upvotes: 10
Reputation: 121
Try this one (removes all elements in the list that equal i
):
for (Object i : l) {
if (condition(i)) {
l = (l.stream().filter((a) -> a != i)).collect(Collectors.toList());
}
}
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 6706
With Eclipse Collections, the method removeIf
defined on MutableCollection will work:
MutableList<Integer> list = Lists.mutable.of(1, 2, 3, 4, 5);
list.removeIf(Predicates.lessThan(3));
Assert.assertEquals(Lists.mutable.of(3, 4, 5), list);
With Java 8 Lambda syntax this can be written as follows:
MutableList<Integer> list = Lists.mutable.of(1, 2, 3, 4, 5);
list.removeIf(Predicates.cast(integer -> integer < 3));
Assert.assertEquals(Lists.mutable.of(3, 4, 5), list);
The call to Predicates.cast()
is necessary here because a default removeIf
method was added on the java.util.Collection
interface in Java 8.
Note: I am a committer for Eclipse Collections.
Upvotes: 12
Reputation: 715
One solution could be to rotate the list and remove the first element to avoid the ConcurrentModificationException or IndexOutOfBoundsException
int n = list.size();
for(int j=0;j<n;j++){
//you can also put a condition before remove
list.remove(0);
Collections.rotate(list, 1);
}
Collections.rotate(list, -1);
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 229581
This works:
Iterator<Integer> iter = l.iterator();
while (iter.hasNext()) {
if (iter.next() == 5) {
iter.remove();
}
}
I assumed that since a foreach loop is syntactic sugar for iterating, using an iterator wouldn't help... but it gives you this .remove()
functionality.
Upvotes: 359
Reputation: 4529
I know this question assumes just a Collection
, and not more specifically any List
. But for those reading this question who are indeed working with a List
reference, you can avoid ConcurrentModificationException
with a while
-loop (while modifying within it) instead if you want to avoid Iterator
(either if you want to avoid it in general, or avoid it specifically to achieve a looping order different from start-to-end stopping at each element [which I believe is the only order Iterator
itself can do]):
*Update: See comments below that clarify the analogous is also achievable with the traditional-for-loop.
final List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<>();
for(int i = 0; i < 10; ++i){
list.add(i);
}
int i = 1;
while(i < list.size()){
if(list.get(i) % 2 == 0){
list.remove(i++);
} else {
i += 2;
}
}
No ConcurrentModificationException from that code.
There we see looping not start at the beginning, and not stop at every element (which I believe Iterator
itself can't do).
FWIW we also see get
being called on list
, which could not be done if its reference was just Collection
(instead of the more specific List
-type of Collection
) - List
interface includes get
, but Collection
interface does not. If not for that difference, then the list
reference could instead be a Collection
[and therefore technically this Answer would then be a direct Answer, instead of a tangential Answer].
FWIWW same code still works after modified to start at beginning at stop at every element (just like Iterator
order):
final List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<>();
for(int i = 0; i < 10; ++i){
list.add(i);
}
int i = 0;
while(i < list.size()){
if(list.get(i) % 2 == 0){
list.remove(i);
} else {
++i;
}
}
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 62789
Iterator.remove()
is safe, you can use it like this:
List<String> list = new ArrayList<>();
// This is a clever way to create the iterator and call iterator.hasNext() like
// you would do in a while-loop. It would be the same as doing:
// Iterator<String> iterator = list.iterator();
// while (iterator.hasNext()) {
for (Iterator<String> iterator = list.iterator(); iterator.hasNext();) {
String string = iterator.next();
if (string.isEmpty()) {
// Remove the current element from the iterator and the list.
iterator.remove();
}
}
Note that Iterator.remove()
is the only safe way to modify a collection during iteration; the behavior is unspecified if the underlying collection is modified in any other way while the iteration is in progress.
Source: docs.oracle > The Collection Interface
And similarly, if you have a ListIterator
and want to add items, you can use ListIterator#add
, for the same reason you can use Iterator#remove
— it's designed to allow it.
In your case you tried to remove from a list, but the same restriction applies if trying to put
into a Map
while iterating its content.
Upvotes: 1672
Reputation: 1386
I know this question is too old to be about Java 8, but for those using Java 8 you can easily use removeIf():
Collection<Integer> l = new ArrayList<Integer>();
for (int i=0; i < 10; ++i) {
l.add(new Integer(4));
l.add(new Integer(5));
l.add(new Integer(6));
}
l.removeIf(i -> i.intValue() == 5);
Upvotes: 1
Reputation: 3762
Example of thread safe collection modification:
public class Example {
private final List<String> queue = Collections.synchronizedList(new ArrayList<String>());
public void removeFromQueue() {
synchronized (queue) {
Iterator<String> iterator = queue.iterator();
String string = iterator.next();
if (string.isEmpty()) {
iterator.remove();
}
}
}
}
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 13416
A ListIterator
allows you to add or remove items in the list. Suppose you have a list of Car
objects:
List<Car> cars = ArrayList<>();
// add cars here...
for (ListIterator<Car> carIterator = cars.listIterator(); carIterator.hasNext(); )
{
if (<some-condition>)
{
carIterator().remove()
}
else if (<some-other-condition>)
{
carIterator().add(aNewCar);
}
}
Upvotes: 3
Reputation: 63
for (Integer i : l)
{
if (i.intValue() == 5){
itemsToRemove.add(i);
break;
}
}
The catch is the after removing the element from the list if you skip the internal iterator.next() call. it still works! Though I dont propose to write code like this it helps to understand the concept behind it :-)
Cheers!
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 1352
ConcurrentHashMap or ConcurrentLinkedQueue or ConcurrentSkipListMap may be another option, because they will never throw any ConcurrentModificationException, even if you remove or add item.
Upvotes: 5
Reputation: 813
In case ArrayList:remove(int index)- if(index is last element's position) it avoids without System.arraycopy()
and takes not time for this.
arraycopy time increases if(index decreases), by the way elements of list also decreases!
the best effective remove way is- removing its elements in descending order:
while(list.size()>0)list.remove(list.size()-1);
//takes O(1)
while(list.size()>0)list.remove(0);
//takes O(factorial(n))
//region prepare data
ArrayList<Integer> ints = new ArrayList<Integer>();
ArrayList<Integer> toRemove = new ArrayList<Integer>();
Random rdm = new Random();
long millis;
for (int i = 0; i < 100000; i++) {
Integer integer = rdm.nextInt();
ints.add(integer);
}
ArrayList<Integer> intsForIndex = new ArrayList<Integer>(ints);
ArrayList<Integer> intsDescIndex = new ArrayList<Integer>(ints);
ArrayList<Integer> intsIterator = new ArrayList<Integer>(ints);
//endregion
// region for index
millis = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i = 0; i < intsForIndex.size(); i++)
if (intsForIndex.get(i) % 2 == 0) intsForIndex.remove(i--);
System.out.println(System.currentTimeMillis() - millis);
// endregion
// region for index desc
millis = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i = intsDescIndex.size() - 1; i >= 0; i--)
if (intsDescIndex.get(i) % 2 == 0) intsDescIndex.remove(i);
System.out.println(System.currentTimeMillis() - millis);
//endregion
// region iterator
millis = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (Iterator<Integer> iterator = intsIterator.iterator(); iterator.hasNext(); )
if (iterator.next() % 2 == 0) iterator.remove();
System.out.println(System.currentTimeMillis() - millis);
//endregion
Upvotes: -1
Reputation: 3060
Since the question has been already answered i.e. the best way is to use the remove method of the iterator object, I would go into the specifics of the place where the error "java.util.ConcurrentModificationException"
is thrown.
Every collection class has a private class which implements the Iterator interface and provides methods like next()
, remove()
and hasNext()
.
The code for next looks something like this...
public E next() {
checkForComodification();
try {
E next = get(cursor);
lastRet = cursor++;
return next;
} catch(IndexOutOfBoundsException e) {
checkForComodification();
throw new NoSuchElementException();
}
}
Here the method checkForComodification
is implemented as
final void checkForComodification() {
if (modCount != expectedModCount)
throw new ConcurrentModificationException();
}
So, as you can see, if you explicitly try to remove an element from the collection. It results in modCount
getting different from expectedModCount
, resulting in the exception ConcurrentModificationException
.
Upvotes: 44
Reputation: 417
I have a suggestion for the problem above. No need of secondary list or any extra time. Please find an example which would do the same stuff but in a different way.
//"list" is ArrayList<Object>
//"state" is some boolean variable, which when set to true, Object will be removed from the list
int index = 0;
while(index < list.size()) {
Object r = list.get(index);
if( state ) {
list.remove(index);
index = 0;
continue;
}
index += 1;
}
This would avoid the Concurrency Exception.
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 54584
In such cases a common trick is (was?) to go backwards:
for(int i = l.size() - 1; i >= 0; i --) {
if (l.get(i) == 5) {
l.remove(i);
}
}
That said, I'm more than happy that you have better ways in Java 8, e.g. removeIf
or filter
on streams.
Upvotes: 19