No relationship between generic parameter and method argument

Hi All,

If you are usinf findbugs to check code quality,
you may see violations like "No relationship between generic parameter and method argument".

Since Map.get() is not fully generic, we often find cases where a developer passed a different type of object (and hence bugs). Frequency of such cases went up when we started using artifacts/services from other teams. What are the reasons why Map.get(Object key) is not (fully) generic explains why get() is not fully generic.

Here's a helper method that provides checked access: public static <K, V> V safeGet(Map<? super K, ? extends V> map, K key) { return map.get(key); }   Sample Usage: Map<List<String>, Date> map = new HashMap<List<String>, Date>(); // this compiles: Date date = safeGet(map, Arrays.asList("")); // this doesn't Date date2 = safeGet(map, "foo");

Malicious code vulnerability - May expose internal representation by returning reference to mutable object

Hi Everyone,

Normally this kind of violations comes when you are using mutable object in getter settter.

Ideally you should not direct return mutable object, instead you can return clone of that mutable object.

If you see this violation in your code , you can use below code for your mutable object :

If you are using Date :

public class DateTest {
    private Date date;

    public DateTest() {

    }

    public Date getDate() {
        return (Date) date.clone();
    }

    public void setDate(Date date) {
        this.date = (Date) date.clone();
    }      
}


If you are using Array:

public String[] getChkBox() {

return (String[])chkBox.clone();

}