Skip to main content

Memory Reference in Apex

Recently during one of project, I was creating a map of integer and list of integer. My code snippet something like:-


I was expecting something like {1=(1), 2=(1,2 ), 3=(1,2,3), 4=(1,2,3,4), 5=(1,2,3,4,5), 6=(1,2,3,4,5,6), ...} as output. However, I was surprise to see the output as {1=(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10), 2=(already output), 3=(already output), 4=(already output), 5=(already output), ...}.

 I was wondering what's wrong with my code and started exploring how I can fix it.

 After going through blogs & docs, I get to know that if I call some method like clear() on a list and put it in a map and use the same variable with modified values for next element of map, ultimately SFDC stores address of same variable in each element of map, because of which I finally get same value in each element of map as per above code.

 If I make a small change in my code,as shown below, my code will start yielding expected result:-


If you closely look into change, instead of using clear() method, in each iteration, I have used 'new List<integer>()', which make sure that SFDC assigns different addresses in each iteration and I am able to get expected value.

Related link http://blogs.developerforce.com/developer-relations/2012/05/passing-parameters-by-reference-and-by-value-in-apex.html

Comments

  1. Ankush Bhatia15 January 2015 at 09:53

    It was worth reading this blog. Quite intersting one. :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sinead9 June 2016 at 06:42

    Thanks for the article Digamber. Lead me in the right direction to solve a problem.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Mashup Integration in Salesforce

During preparation for TA certification exam, I came across a word Mashup for integration a number of times. I explored about it and below is description:- Mashups, sometimes called “composites,” are hybrid applications created by bringing together several data sources and Web services to create a new application or to add value to an existing application. Behind the scenes, mashups may require different levels of integration, depending on whether the mashed-up data is only meant to be viewed, whether it can be edited, and whether data is actually transferred between systems. There are three types of mashup:- Client Presentation Mashup - In this type of mashup the integration takes place strictly at the visual level. It makes possible to view data from two or more applications in a browser,  without actually moving data between the applications. Example - Google Maps. Client Service Mashup - As mashups evolve, they are becoming more complex and sophisticated. Client...
16 comments
Read more

Make Calls to PageReference.getContent() in Asynchronous Apex - Winter16

You can now make calls to the getContent() and getContentAsPdf() methods of the PageReference class from within asynchronous Apex such as Batch Apex, Schedulable and Queueable classes, and @future methods. This allows you to design much more flexible and scalable services that, for example, render Visualforce pages as PDF files.
5 comments
Read more

Hierarchical Relationship

Recently, I came across one of requirement where client wanted to have a custom lookup field on User object. This lookup will be on User. Based upon certain criteria, value of this field will go to Manager field. They didn't want update of Manager, but on the basis of some business use case. First impression to me was it will be straight forward to create a lookup on user and then in trigger will check for business use case and update Manager field accordingly. However, when I proceed with creating a look on User object, I couldn't find an option ' Lookup Relationship ' on first screen of 'New Custom Field'.  In fact, I saw only available option ' Hierarchical Relationship ' for creating any sort of relationship. I know most of us know about it. But you can't defer on my opinion that we tend to forget these small stuff. Since, on user you can't have any direct relationship, but only user. Salesforce gives you special relationship data t...
6 comments
Read more