Given the code fragment: Map<Integer, Integer> mVal = new HashMap<>(); mVal.put(1, 10); mVal.put(2, 20); //line n1 c.accept(1, 2); mVal.forEach(c); Which statement can be inserted into line n1 to…

Question

Options

• ABiConsumer<Integer, Integer> c = (i,j) -> System.out.print (i + "," + j + " ");
• BBiFunction<Integer, Integer, String> c = (i,j) ?gt;:(System.out.print (i + "," + j + " "));
• CBiConsumer<Integer, Integer, String> c = (i,j) ?gt;:(System.out.print (i + "," + j + " "));
• DBiConsumer<Integer, Integer> Integer> c = (i,j) ?gt;:(System.out.print (i + "," + j + " "));

• A
  73% (29)
• B
  3% (1)
• C
  8% (3)
• D
  18% (7)

Explanation

Option A is correct because BiConsumer<T, U> is a functional interface with an accept(T, U) method that takes two inputs and returns void - which satisfies both c.accept(1, 2) (prints 1,2) and Map.forEach(c), which expects a BiConsumer<K, V> to receive each key-value pair (printing 1,10 then 2,20). The lambda (i,j) -> System.out.print(...) is void-returning, which aligns perfectly with BiConsumer.

B is wrong because BiFunction<T, U, R> returns a value (here String), but System.out.print returns void - the types are incompatible; also, Map.forEach requires a BiConsumer, not a BiFunction, and BiFunction uses .apply() not .accept(). C is wrong because BiConsumer only accepts two type parameters - BiConsumer<Integer, Integer, String> with three is not a valid type and will not compile. D is wrong because BiConsumer<Integer, Integer> Integer> is simply malformed syntax - the diamond is closed early, making it a compile error.

Memory tip: Think of the name literally - Bi = two inputs, Consumer = consumes (no return value). Whenever you see Map.forEach, it always wants a BiConsumer<K, V>, and any lambda you pass must be void-returning to match.

No community discussion yet for this question.