How to directly initialize a HashMap (in a literal way)?

Question

Is there some way of initializing a Java HashMap like this?:

Map<String,String> test = 
    new HashMap<String, String>{"test":"test","test":"test"};

What would be the correct syntax? I have not found anything regarding this. Is this possible? I am looking for the shortest/fastest way to put some "final/static" values in a map that never change and are known in advance when creating the Map.

Answer 1

All Versions

In case you happen to need just a single entry: There is Collections.singletonMap("key", "value").

For Java Version 9 or higher:

Yes, this is possible now. In Java 9 a couple of factory methods have been added that simplify the creation of maps :

// this works for up to 10 elements:
Map<String, String> test1 = Map.of(
    "a", "b",
    "c", "d"
);

// this works for any number of elements:
import static java.util.Map.entry;    
Map<String, String> test2 = Map.ofEntries(
    entry("a", "b"),
    entry("c", "d")
);

In the example above both test and test2 will be the same, just with different ways of expressing the Map. The Map.of method is defined for up to ten elements in the map, while the Map.ofEntries method will have no such limit.

Note that in this case the resulting map will be an immutable map. If you want the map to be mutable, you could copy it again, e.g. using mutableMap = new HashMap<>(Map.of("a", "b"));. Also note that in this case keys and values must not be null.

(See also JEP 269 and the Javadoc)

For up to Java Version 8:

No, you will have to add all the elements manually. You can use an initializer in an anonymous subclass to make the syntax a little bit shorter:

Map<String, String> myMap = new HashMap<String, String>() {{
    put("a", "b");
    put("c", "d");
}};

However, the anonymous subclass might introduce unwanted behavior in some cases. This includes for example:

• It generates an additional class which increases memory consumption, disk space consumption and startup-time
• In case of a non-static method: It holds a reference to the object the creating method was called upon. That means the object of the outer class cannot be garbage collected while the created map object is still referenced, thus blocking additional memory

Using a function for initialization will also enable you to generate a map in an initializer, but avoids nasty side-effects:

Map<String, String> myMap = createMap();

private static Map<String, String> createMap() {
    Map<String,String> myMap = new HashMap<String,String>();
    myMap.put("a", "b");
    myMap.put("c", "d");
    return myMap;
}

Answer 2

This is one way.

Map<String, String> h = new HashMap<String, String>() {{
    put("a","b");
}};

However, you should be careful and make sure that you understand the above code (it creates a new class that inherits from HashMap). Therefore, you should read more here: http://www.c2.com/cgi/wiki?DoubleBraceInitialization , or simply use Guava:

Map<String, Integer> left = ImmutableMap.of("a", 1, "b", 2, "c", 3);

ImmutableMap.of works for up to 5 entries. Otherwise, use the builder: source.

Answer 3

If you allow 3rd party libs, you can use Guava's ImmutableMap to achieve literal-like brevity:

Map<String, String> test = ImmutableMap.of("k1", "v1", "k2", "v2");

This works for up to 5 key/value pairs, otherwise you can use its builder:

Map<String, String> test = ImmutableMap.<String, String>builder()
    .put("k1", "v1")
    .put("k2", "v2")
    ...
    .build();

• note that Guava's ImmutableMap implementation differs from Java's HashMap implementation (most notably it is immutable and does not permit null keys/values)
• for more info, see Guava's user guide article on its immutable collection types

Answer 4

There is no direct way to do this - As of 2021, Java has no Map literals (yet - I think they were proposed for Java 8, but didn't make it).

Some people like this:

Map<String,String> test = new HashMap<String, String>(){{
       put("test","test"); put("test","test");}};

This creates an anonymous subclass of HashMap, whose instance initializer puts these values. (By the way, a map can't contain twice the same value, your second put will overwrite the first one. I'll use different values for the next examples.)

The normal way would be this (for a local variable):

Map<String,String> test = new HashMap<String, String>();
test.put("test","test");
test.put("test1","test2");

If your test map is an instance variable, put the initialization in a constructor or instance initializer:

Map<String,String> test = new HashMap<String, String>();
{
    test.put("test","test");
    test.put("test1","test2");
}

If your test map is a class variable, put the initialization in a static initializer:

static Map<String,String> test = new HashMap<String, String>();
static {
    test.put("test","test");
    test.put("test1","test2");
}

If you want your map to never change, you should after the initialization wrap your map by Collections.unmodifiableMap(...). You can do this in a static initializer too:

static Map<String,String> test;
{
    Map<String,String> temp = new HashMap<String, String>();
    temp.put("test","test");
    temp.put("test1","test2");
    test = Collections.unmodifiableMap(temp);
}

(I'm not sure if you can now make test final ... try it out and report here.)

Since Java 9, you also have the Map.of(...) and Map.ofEntries() syntax, as explained in the answer from yankee.

Answer 5

Map<String,String> test = new HashMap<String, String>()
{
    {
        put(key1, value1);
        put(key2, value2);
    }
};

Answer 6

An alternative, using plain Java 7 classes and varargs: create a class HashMapBuilder with this method:

public static HashMap<String, String> build(String... data){
    HashMap<String, String> result = new HashMap<String, String>();

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

    String key = null;
    Integer step = -1;

    for(String value : data){
        step++;
        switch(step % 2){
        case 0: 
            if(value == null)
                throw new IllegalArgumentException("Null key value"); 
            key = value;
            continue;
        case 1:             
            result.put(key, value);
            break;
        }
    }

    return result;
}

Use the method like this:

HashMap<String,String> data = HashMapBuilder.build("key1","value1","key2","value2");

Answer 7

tl;dr

Use Map.of… methods in Java 9 and later.

Map< String , String > animalSounds =
    Map.of(
        "dog"  , "bark" ,   // key , value
        "cat"  , "meow" ,   // key , value
        "bird" , "chirp"    // key , value
    )
;

Map.of

Java 9 added a series of Map.of static methods to do just what you want: Instantiate an immutable Map using literal syntax.

The map (a collection of entries) is immutable, so you cannot add or remove entries after instantiating. Also, the key and the value of each entry is immutable, cannot be changed. See the Javadoc for other rules, such as no NULLs allowed, no duplicate keys allowed, and the iteration order of mappings is arbitrary.

Let's look at these methods, using some sample data for a map of day-of-week to a person who we expect will work on that day.

Person alice = new Person( "Alice" );
Person bob = new Person( "Bob" );
Person carol = new Person( "Carol" );

Map.of()

Map.of creates an empty Map. Unmodifiable, so you cannot add entries. Here is an example of such a map, empty with no entries.

Map < DayOfWeek, Person > dailyWorkerEmpty = Map.of();

dailyWorkerEmpty.toString(): {}

Map.of( … )

Map.of( k , v , k , v , …) are several methods that take 1 to 10 key-value pairs. Here is an example of two entries.

Map < DayOfWeek, Person > weekendWorker = 
        Map.of( 
            DayOfWeek.SATURDAY , alice ,     // key , value
            DayOfWeek.SUNDAY , bob           // key , value
        )
;

weekendWorker.toString(): {SUNDAY=Person{ name='Bob' }, SATURDAY=Person{ name='Alice' }}

Map.ofEntries( … )

Map.ofEntries( Map.Entry , … ) takes any number of objects implementing the Map.Entry interface. Java bundles two classes implementing that interface, one mutable, the other immutable: AbstractMap.SimpleEntry, AbstractMap.SimpleImmutableEntry. But we need not specify a concrete class. We merely need to call Map.entry( k , v ) method, pass our key and our value, and we get back an object of a some class implementing Map.Entry interface.

Map < DayOfWeek, Person > weekdayWorker = Map.ofEntries(
        Map.entry( DayOfWeek.MONDAY , alice ) ,            // Call to `Map.entry` method returns an object implementing `Map.Entry`. 
        Map.entry( DayOfWeek.TUESDAY , bob ) ,
        Map.entry( DayOfWeek.WEDNESDAY , bob ) ,
        Map.entry( DayOfWeek.THURSDAY , carol ) ,
        Map.entry( DayOfWeek.FRIDAY , carol )
);

weekdayWorker.toString(): {WEDNESDAY=Person{ name='Bob' }, TUESDAY=Person{ name='Bob' }, THURSDAY=Person{ name='Carol' }, FRIDAY=Person{ name='Carol' }, MONDAY=Person{ name='Alice' }}

Map.copyOf

Java 10 added the method Map.copyOf. Pass an existing map, get back an immutable copy of that map.

For efficiency, if the passed map is already truly immutable, the copyOf method returns a reference to the original without manufacturing a new map.

About Collections.unmodifiableMap

Tip: Prefer Map.copyOf over Collections.unmodifiableMap if you need/expect a truly immutable map.

The Collections method produces a view onto the original map, a mere wrapper, not a true copy. The upside: Being a mere view has the benefit of conserving memory. The downside: Modifications to the original show through.

If the original map gets modified (put, remove, etc.), the supposedly-unmodifiable will actually show the modification. In contrast, the Map.copyOf does indeed produce a true copy of the passed map if not already truly immutable.

record Person( String name ) { }
Person alice = new Person ( "Alice" );
Person bob = new Person ( "Bob" );
Map < DayOfWeek, Person > weekendWorkerMutable = HashMap.newHashMap ( 2 );
weekendWorkerMutable.put ( DayOfWeek.SATURDAY , bob );
weekendWorkerMutable.put ( DayOfWeek.SUNDAY , bob );
System.out.println ( "weekendWorkerMutable = " + weekendWorkerMutable );

Map < DayOfWeek, Person > weekendWorkerSupposedlyUnmodifiable = Collections.unmodifiableMap ( weekendWorkerMutable );
System.out.println ( "weekendWorkerSupposedlyUnmodifiable = " + weekendWorkerSupposedlyUnmodifiable );
Map < DayOfWeek, Person > trueCopy = Map.copyOf ( weekendWorkerSupposedlyUnmodifiable );
System.out.println ( "trueCopy = " + trueCopy );

weekendWorkerMutable.put ( DayOfWeek.SATURDAY , alice );  // <--- Modify the original.

System.out.println ( " ----- After mutating the original mutable map  ----- " );
System.out.println ( "weekendWorkerSupposedlyUnmodifiable = " + weekendWorkerSupposedlyUnmodifiable );
System.out.println ( "trueCopy = " + trueCopy );

When run:

• We see that the supposedly unmodifiable is indeed modifiable indirectly, by modifying the original map on which the unmodifiable map is a view.
• In contrast, the copyOf method produces a true copy, showing Bob as working the entire weekend even after assigning Alice.

weekendWorkerMutable = {SATURDAY=Person[name=Bob], SUNDAY=Person[name=Bob]}
weekendWorkerSupposedlyUnmodifiable = {SATURDAY=Person[name=Bob], SUNDAY=Person[name=Bob]}
trueCopy = {SUNDAY=Person[name=Bob], SATURDAY=Person[name=Bob]}
 ----- After mutating the original mutable map  ----- 
weekendWorkerSupposedlyUnmodifiable = {SATURDAY=Person[name=Alice], SUNDAY=Person[name=Bob]}
trueCopy = {SUNDAY=Person[name=Bob], SATURDAY=Person[name=Bob]}

Notes

Notice that the iterator order of maps produced via Map.of are not guaranteed. The entries have an arbitrary order. Do not write code based on the order seen, as the documentation warns the order is subject to change.

Note that all of these Map.of… methods return a Map of an unspecified class. The underlying concrete class may even vary from one version of Java to another. This anonymity enables Java to choose from various implementations, whatever optimally fits your particular data. For example, if your keys come from an enum, Java might use an EnumMap under the covers.

Answer 8

JAVA 8

In plain java 8 you also have the possibility of using Streams/Collectors to do the job.

Map<String, String> myMap = Stream.of(
         new SimpleEntry<>("key1", "value1"),
         new SimpleEntry<>("key2", "value2"),
         new SimpleEntry<>("key3", "value3"))
        .collect(toMap(SimpleEntry::getKey, SimpleEntry::getValue));

This has the advantage of not creating an Anonymous class.

Note that the imports are:

import static java.util.stream.Collectors.toMap;
import java.util.AbstractMap.SimpleEntry;

Of course, as noted in other answers, in java 9 onwards you have simpler ways of doing the same.

Answer 9

I would like to give a brief warning to Johnny Willer's answer.

Collectors.toMap relies on Map.merge and does not expect null values, so it will throw a NullPointerException as it was described in this bug report: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148463

Also, if a key appears several times, the default Collectors.toMap will throw an IllegalStateException.

An alternative way to get a map with null values using a builder syntax on Java 8 is writing a custom collector backed by a HashMap (because it does allow null values):

Map<String, String> myMap = Stream.of(
         new SimpleEntry<>("key1", "value1"),
         new SimpleEntry<>("key2", (String) null),
         new SimpleEntry<>("key3", "value3"),
         new SimpleEntry<>("key1", "value1updated"))
        .collect(HashMap::new,
                (map, entry) -> map.put(entry.getKey(),
                                        entry.getValue()),
                HashMap::putAll);

Answer 10

We use a simple utility class to initialize Maps in a fluent way:

Map<String, String> map = MapInit
    .init("key1", "value1")
    .put("key2", "value2")
    .put("key3", "value3")
    .getMap();

The utility class isn't limited neither regarding the type of keys and values nor regarding the amount of entries nor regarding the type of the resulting Map.

The utility class looks like the following:

public class MapInit<K, V, T extends Map<K, V>> {
    private final T map;


    private MapInit(final T map) {
        this.map = map;
    }

    public T getMap() {
        return this.map;
    }

    public static <K, V> MapInit<K, V, HashMap<K, V>> init(final K key, final V value) {
        return init(HashMap::new, key, value);
    }

    public static <K, V, T extends Map<K, V>> MapInit<K, V, T> init(final Supplier<T> mapSupplier, final K key, final V value) {
        return new MapInit<>(mapSupplier.get()) //
                .put(key, value);
    }

    public MapInit<K, V, T> put(final K key, final V value) {
        this.map.put(key, value);
        return this;
    }
}

Answer 11

I found a great article by baeldung that lists several ways to do this in different Java versions.

A couple of interesting ways that can be handy are

For any Java version

public static Map<String, String> articleMapOne;
static {
    articleMapOne = new HashMap<>();
    articleMapOne.put("ar01", "Intro to Map");
    articleMapOne.put("ar02", "Some article");
}

For Java 8 using streams

Map<String, String> map = Stream.of(new String[][] {
  { "Hello", "World" }, 
  { "John", "Doe" }, 
}).collect(Collectors.toMap(data -> data[0], data -> data[1]));

Answer 12

We can use AbstractMap Class having SimpleEntry which allows the creation of immutable map

Map<String, String> map5 = Stream.of(
    new AbstractMap.SimpleEntry<>("Sakshi","java"),
    new AbstractMap.SimpleEntry<>("fine","python")
    ).collect(Collectors.toMap(Map.Entry::getKey, Map.Entry::getValue));
    
    System.out.println(map5.get("Sakshi"));
    map5.put("Shiva", "Javascript");
    System.out.println(map5.get("Shiva"));// here we can add multiple entries.

Answer 13

You could possibly make your own Map.of (which is only available in Java 9 and higher) method easily in 2 easy ways

Make it with a set amount of parameters

Example

public <K,V> Map<K,V> mapOf(K k1, V v1, K k2, V v2 /* perhaps more parameters */) {
    return new HashMap<K, V>() {{
      put(k1, v1);
      put(k2,  v2);
      // etc...
    }};
}

Make it using a List

You can also make this using a list, instead of making a lot of methods for a certain set of parameters.

Example

public <K, V> Map<K, V> mapOf(List<K> keys, List<V> values) {
   if(keys.size() != values.size()) {
        throw new IndexOutOfBoundsException("amount of keys and values is not equal");
    }

    return new HashMap<K, V>() {{
        IntStream.range(0, keys.size()).forEach(index -> put(keys.get(index), values.get(index)));
    }};
}

Note It is not recommended to use this for everything as this makes an anonymous class every time you use this.

Answer 14

If you need to place only one key-value pair, you can use Collections.singletonMap(key, value);

Answer 15

With Java 8 or less

You can use static block to initialize a map with some values. Example :

public static Map<String,String> test = new HashMap<String, String>

static {
    test.put("test","test");
    test.put("test1","test");
}

With Java 9 or more

You can use Map.of() method to initialize a map with some values while declaring. Example :

public static Map<String,String> test = Map.of("test","test","test1","test");

Answer 16

Following code can do the trick in Java 8:

Map<String, Integer> map = Stream.of(new Object[][] { 
     { "data1", 1 }, 
     { "data2", 2 }, 
 }).collect(Collectors.toMap(data -> (String) data[0], data -> (Integer) data[1]));

credits:

Answer 17

Simple way to do this:

public static Map<String, String> mapWithValues(String...values) {
    Map<String, String> map = new HashMap<String, String>();
    
    for (int x = 0; x < values.length; x = x+2) {
        map.put(values[x], values[x+1]);
    }
    
    return map;
}

Answer 18

If it's an instance variable, then an instance initialization block is definitely the way to go, especially if you can't use Map.of() because you need a different type of map.

But if you're feeling frisky, you could use a Java 8 Supplier (not recommended).

private final Map<String,Runnable> games = ((Supplier<Map<String,Runnable>>)() -> {
  Map<String,Runnable> map = new LinkedHashMap<>();

  map.put("solarus",this::playSolarus);
  map.put("lichess",this::playLichess);

  return map;
}).get();

Or make your own functional interface (looks fine to me):

@FunctionalInterface
public interface MapMaker<M> {
  static <M extends Map<K,V>,K,V> M make(M map,MapMaker<M> maker) {
    maker.build(map);
    return map;
  }

  void build(M map);
}

// Can use LinkedHashMap!
private final Map<String,Runnable> games = MapMaker.make(
    new LinkedHashMap<>(),(map) -> {
      map.put("solarus",this::playSolarus);
      map.put("lichess",this::playLichess);
    });

Answer 19

Unfortunately, using varargs if the type of the keys and values are not the same is not very reasonable as you'd have to use Object... and lose type safety completely. If you always want to create e.g. a Map<String, String>, of course a toMap(String... args) would be possible though, but not very pretty as it would be easy to mix up keys and values, and an odd number of arguments would be invalid.

You could create a sub-class of HashMap that has a chainable method like

public class ChainableMap<K, V> extends HashMap<K, V> {
  public ChainableMap<K, V> set(K k, V v) {
    put(k, v);
    return this;
  }
}

and use it like new ChainableMap<String, Object>().set("a", 1).set("b", "foo")

Another approach is to use the common builder pattern:

public class MapBuilder<K, V> {
  private Map<K, V> mMap = new HashMap<>();

  public MapBuilder<K, V> put(K k, V v) {
    mMap.put(k, v);
    return this;
  }

  public Map<K, V> build() {
    return mMap;
  }
}

and use it like new MapBuilder<String, Object>().put("a", 1).put("b", "foo").build();

However, the solution I've used now and then utilizes varargs and the Pair class:

public class Maps {
  public static <K, V> Map<K, V> of(Pair<K, V>... pairs) {
    Map<K, V> = new HashMap<>();

    for (Pair<K, V> pair : pairs) {
      map.put(pair.first, pair.second);
    }

    return map;
  }
}

Map<String, Object> map = Maps.of(Pair.create("a", 1), Pair.create("b", "foo");

The verbosity of Pair.create() bothers me a bit, but this works quite fine. If you don't mind static imports you could of course create a helper:

public <K, V> Pair<K, V> p(K k, V v) {
  return Pair.create(k, v);
}

Map<String, Object> map = Maps.of(p("a", 1), p("b", "foo");

(Instead of Pair one could imagine using Map.Entry, but since it's an interface it requires an implementing class and/or a helper factory method. It's also not immutable, and contains other logic not useful for this task.)

Answer 20

You can use Streams In Java 8 (this is exmaple of Set):

@Test
public void whenInitializeUnmodifiableSetWithDoubleBrace_containsElements() {
    Set<String> countries = Stream.of("India", "USSR", "USA")
      .collect(collectingAndThen(toSet(), Collections::unmodifiableSet));

    assertTrue(countries.contains("India"));
}

Ref: https://www.baeldung.com/java-double-brace-initialization

Answer 21

You can create a method to initialize the map like in this example below:

Map<String, Integer> initializeMap()
{
  Map<String, Integer> ret = new HashMap<>();

  //populate ret
  ...

  return ret;
}

//call
Map<String, Integer> map = initializeMap();

Answer 22

Map.of() seems most universal and least limited. Here, it takes care of non object input values automaticaly :

List<Map<String, Object> certs = new ArrayList<>(){{ add( Map.of(
    "TAG",          Obj1 // Object
    "TAGGED_ID",    1L //Long
    "DEGREE",       "PARENT" // String
    "DATE",         LocalDate.now() // LocalDate
));}};

Note that maps created by static Map.of(..) constuctor don't allow neither keys nor values to be null .