Yahoo Web Search

Search results

1. • • Faster Clearing: The CTS reduces the time taken for cheque clearance from days to just a few hours, enabling quicker access to funds for both the payee and the drawer. Enhanced Security: Electronic images ensure that the cheque does not physically move through multiple hands, minimizing the risk of loss or theft.
     enterslice.com › learning › cheque-truncation-system

     What is Cheque Truncation System and how it benefits ...

2. Top results related to what are the benefits of cheque truncation in java

   • What are the benefits of the Iterator interface in Java?

     Top Answer

     Answered Sep 18, 2008 · 18 votes

     Why is this interface used?

     Because it supports the basic operations that would allow a client programmer to iterate over any kind of collection (note: not necessarily a Collection in the Object sense).

     Why are the methods... not directly coded to the data structure implementation itself?

     They are, they're just marked Private so you can't reach into them and muck with them. More specifically:

     • You can implement or subclass an Iterator such that it does something the standard ones don't do, without having to alter the actual object it iterates over.
     • Objects that can be traversed over don't need to have their interfaces cluttered up with traversal methods, in particular any highly specialized methods.
     • You can hand out Iterators to however many clients you wish, and each client may traverse in their own time, at their own speed.
     • Java Iterators from the java.util package in particular will throw an exception if the storage that backs them is modified while you still have an Iterator out. This exception lets you know that the Iterator may now be returning invalid objects.

     For simple programs, none of this probably seems worthwhile. The kind of complexity that makes them useful will come up on you quickly, though.

     Other Answers

     Answered Jun 20, 2020 · 6 votes

     You ask: "Why are the methods hasNext(), next() and remove() not directly coded to the data structure implementation itself?".

     The Java Collections framework chooses to define the Iterator interface as externalized to the collection itself. Normally, since every Java collection implements the Iterable interface, a Java program will call iterator to create its own iterator so that it can be used in a loop. As others have pointed out, Java 5 allows us to direct usage of the iterator, with a for-each loop.

     Externalizing the iterator to its collection allows the client to control how one iterates through a collection. One use case that I can think of where this is useful is when one has an an unbounded collection such as all the web pages on the Internet to index.

     In the classic GoF book, the contrast between internal and external iterators is spelled out quite clearly.

     A fundamental issue is deciding which party conrols the iteration, the iterator or the client that uses the iterator. When the client controls the iteration, the iterator is called an external iterator, and when the iterator controls it, the iterator is an internal iterator. Clients that use an external iterator must advance the traversal and request the next element explicitly from the iterator. In contrast, the client hands an internal iterator an operation to perform, and the iterator applies that operation to every element ....

     External iterators are more flexible than internal iterators. It's easy to compare two collections for equality with an external iterator, for example, but it's practically impossible with internal iterators ... But on the other hand, internal iterators are easier to use, because they define the iteration logic for you.

     For an example of how internal iterators work, see Ruby's Enumerable API, which has internal iteration methods such as each. In Ruby, the idea is to pass a block of code (i.e. a closure) to an internal iterator so that a collection can take care of its own iteration.

     Other Answers

     Answered Oct 07, 2008 · 5 votes

     it is important to keep the collection apart from the pointer. the iterator points at a specific place in a collection, and thus is not an integral part of the collection. this way, for an instance, you can use several iterators over the same collection.

     the down-side of this seperation is that the iterator is not aware to changes made to the collection it iterates on. so you cannot change the collection's structure and expect the iterator to continue it's work without "complaints".

     Check all answers on Stack Overflow

     1/5

   • What are the benefits of Java's types erasure?

     Top Answer

     Answered Jan 25, 2023 · 101 votes

     Type Erasure Is Good

     Let's stick to the facts

     A lot of the answers thus far are overly concerned with the Twitter user. It's helpful to keep focused on the messages and not the messenger. There is a fairly consistent message with even just the excerpts mentioned thus far:

     It's funny when Java users complain about type erasure, which is the only thing Java got right, while ignoring all the things it got wrong.

     I get huge benefits (e.g. parametricity) and nil cost (alleged cost is a limit of imagination).

     new T is a broken program. It is isomorphic to the claim "all propositions are true." I am not big into this.

     A goal: reasonable programs

     These tweets reflect a perspective that is not interested in whether we can make the machine do something, but more whether we can reason that the machine will do something we actually want. Good reasoning is a proof. Proofs can be specified in formal notation or something less formal. Regardless of the specification language, they must be clear and rigorous. Informal specifications are not impossible to structure correctly, but are often flawed in practical programming. We end up with remediations like automated and exploratory tests to make up for the problems we have with informal reasoning. This is not to say that testing is intrinsically a bad idea, but the quoted Twitter user is suggesting that there is a much better way.

     So our goal is to have correct programs that we can reason about clearly and rigorously in a way that corresponds with how the machine will actually execute the program. This, though, is not the only goal. We also want our logic to have a degree of expressivity. For example, there's only so much we can express with propositional logic. It's nice to have universal (∀) and existential (∃) quantification from something like first-order logic.

     Using type systems for reasoning

     These goals can be very nicely addressed by type systems. This is especially clear because of the Curry-Howard correspondence. This correspondence is often expressed with the following analogy: types are to programs as theorems are to proofs.

     This correspondence is somewhat profound. We can take logical expressions, and translate them through the correspondence to types. Then if we have a program with the same type signature that compiles, we have proven that the logical expression is universally true (a tautology). This is because the correspondence is two-way. The transformation between the type/program and the theorem/proof worlds are mechanical, and can in many cases be automated.

     Curry-Howard plays nicely into what we'd like to do with specifications for a program.

     Are type systems useful in Java?

     Even with an understanding of Curry-Howard, some people find it easy to dismiss the value of a type system, when it

     • is extremely hard to work with
     • corresponds (through Curry-Howard) to a logic with limited expressivity
     • is broken (which gets to the characterization of systems as "weak" or "strong").

     Regarding the first point, perhaps IDEs make Java's type system easy enough to work with (that's highly subjective).

     Regarding the second point, Java happens to almost correspond to a first-order logic. Generics give use the type system equivalent of universal quantification. Unfortunately, wildcards only give us a small fraction of existential quantification. But universal quantification is pretty good start. It's nice to be able to say that functions for List<A> work universally for all possible lists because A is completely unconstrained. This leads to what the Twitter user is talking about with respect to "parametricity."

     An often-cited paper about parametricity is Philip Wadler's Theorems for free!. What's interesting about this paper is that from just the type signature alone, we can prove some very interesting invariants. If we were to write automated tests for these invariants we would be very much wasting our time. For example, for List<A>, from the type signature alone for flatten

     <A> List<A> flatten(List<List<A>> nestedLists);-

     we can reason that

     flatten(nestedList.map(l -> l.map(any_function))) ≡ flatten(nestedList).map(any_function)-

     That's a simple example, and you can probably reason about it informally, but it's even nicer when we get such proofs formally for free from the type system and checked by the compiler.

     Not erasing can lead to abuses

     From the perspective of language implementation, Java's generics (which correspond to universal types) play very heavily into the parametricity used to get proofs about what our programs do. This gets to the third problem mentioned. All these gains of proof and correctness require a sound type system implemented without defects. Java definitely has some language features that allow us to shatter our reasoning. These include but are not limited to:

     • side-effects with an external system
     • reflection

     Non-erased generics are in many ways related to reflection. Without erasure there's runtime information that's carried with the implementation that we can use to design our algorithms. What this means is that statically, when we reason about programs, we don't have the full picture. Reflection severely threatens the correctness of any proofs we reason about statically. It's no coincidence reflection also leads to a variety of tricky defects.

     So what are ways that non-erased generics might be "useful?" Let's consider the usage mentioned in the tweet:

     <T> T broken { return new T(); }-

     What happens if T doesn't have a no-arg constructor? In some languages what you get is null. Or perhaps you skip the null value and go straight to raising an exception (which null values seem to lead to anyway). Because our language is Turing complete, it's impossible to reason about which calls to broken will involve "safe" types with no-arg constructors and which ones won't. We've lost the certainty that our program works universally.

     Erasing means we've reasoned (so let's erase)

     So if we want to reason about our programs, we're strongly advised to not employ language features that strongly threaten our reasoning. Once we do that, then why not just drop the types at runtime? They're not needed. We can get some efficiency and simplicity with the satisfaction that no casts will fail or that methods might be missing upon invocation.

     Erasing encourages reasoning.

     Other Answers

     Answered Jun 20, 2020 · 6 votes

     You ask: "Why are the methods hasNext(), next() and remove() not directly coded to the data structure implementation itself?".

     The Java Collections framework chooses to define the Iterator interface as externalized to the collection itself. Normally, since every Java collection implements the Iterable interface, a Java program will call iterator to create its own iterator so that it can be used in a loop. As others have pointed out, Java 5 allows us to direct usage of the iterator, with a for-each loop.

     Externalizing the iterator to its collection allows the client to control how one iterates through a collection. One use case that I can think of where this is useful is when one has an an unbounded collection such as all the web pages on the Internet to index.

     In the classic GoF book, the contrast between internal and external iterators is spelled out quite clearly.

     A fundamental issue is deciding which party conrols the iteration, the iterator or the client that uses the iterator. When the client controls the iteration, the iterator is called an external iterator, and when the iterator controls it, the iterator is an internal iterator. Clients that use an external iterator must advance the traversal and request the next element explicitly from the iterator. In contrast, the client hands an internal iterator an operation to perform, and the iterator applies that operation to every element ....

     External iterators are more flexible than internal iterators. It's easy to compare two collections for equality with an external iterator, for example, but it's practically impossible with internal iterators ... But on the other hand, internal iterators are easier to use, because they define the iteration logic for you.

     For an example of how internal iterators work, see Ruby's Enumerable API, which has internal iteration methods such as each. In Ruby, the idea is to pass a block of code (i.e. a closure) to an internal iterator so that a collection can take care of its own iteration.

     Other Answers

     Answered Oct 07, 2008 · 5 votes

     it is important to keep the collection apart from the pointer. the iterator points at a specific place in a collection, and thus is not an integral part of the collection. this way, for an instance, you can use several iterators over the same collection.

     the down-side of this seperation is that the iterator is not aware to changes made to the collection it iterates on. so you cannot change the collection's structure and expect the iterator to continue it's work without "complaints".

     Check all answers on Stack Overflow

     2/5

   • What are the benefits of Spring Framework in Terms of Testing Application?

     Top Answer

     Answered May 04, 2011 · 6 votes

     An application geared towards dependency injection is typically more testable because resources are easily replaced with test-oriented resources. Consider a service object that uses a data access object; in production, you'd inject a DAO that talked to a backend data store. But for each test you could create a DAO that returned specific, known data; this allows you to focus on the object being tested.

     Spring is one of many dependency injection frameworks for Java, albeit the most popular; any DI framework is going to give you this kind of benefit.

     Check all answers on Stack Overflow

     3/5

   • What are the benefits of using groovy for writing integration tests for java applications?

     Top Answer

     Answered Mar 20, 2013 · 4 votes

     I will soon start a project with exactly the same stack as yours, but Groovy will also be in production code, not only tests.

     There is no problem in adding Groovy to your codebase, because it is an easy language. It'd be a different story if you were including some language which doesn't look a lot like java, say haskell or prolog. You are already including Facelets, EL, CSS, HTML and Javascript. Which part of adding another language is bad? :-)

     The main points i pick up for Groovy in IT tests:

     • Easy to write assertions and mock data;
     • Conciseness in code;
     • Smooth learning curve;
     • Concise code to operate a browser automation like Geb;

     Other just-to-cool-to-forget stuff in Groovy:

     • Easy to write XML/JSON (if you need test webservices, for example);
     • Static compilation, if you need;

     We had test teams in my two last companies which weren't working in production code, but started writing tests in Groovy pretty quickly and enjoyed the language: no worries about types and stuff, just working tests!

     Check all answers on Stack Overflow

     4/5

   • What are the main benefits of using Mono over Java?

     Top Answer

     Answered Feb 22, 2009 · 62 votes

     The answer is pretty obvious: because you want to use .Net on Linux.

     This of course begs the question (which I think is really what you're getting at): why would you want to use .Net on Linux (over Java)?

     Lots of reasons:

     • Common code between your server and, say, a WPF or Winforms app;
     • Use of a particular .Net language, like F#;
     • Language features that aren't in Java (closures, operator overloading, partial classes, runtime generics, indexers, delegates, LINQ, var types, etc etc etc);
     • Your skills or those of your team are already in C#;
     • etc.

     Other Answers

     Answered Jun 20, 2020 · 6 votes

     You ask: "Why are the methods hasNext(), next() and remove() not directly coded to the data structure implementation itself?".

     The Java Collections framework chooses to define the Iterator interface as externalized to the collection itself. Normally, since every Java collection implements the Iterable interface, a Java program will call iterator to create its own iterator so that it can be used in a loop. As others have pointed out, Java 5 allows us to direct usage of the iterator, with a for-each loop.

     Externalizing the iterator to its collection allows the client to control how one iterates through a collection. One use case that I can think of where this is useful is when one has an an unbounded collection such as all the web pages on the Internet to index.

     In the classic GoF book, the contrast between internal and external iterators is spelled out quite clearly.

     A fundamental issue is deciding which party conrols the iteration, the iterator or the client that uses the iterator. When the client controls the iteration, the iterator is called an external iterator, and when the iterator controls it, the iterator is an internal iterator. Clients that use an external iterator must advance the traversal and request the next element explicitly from the iterator. In contrast, the client hands an internal iterator an operation to perform, and the iterator applies that operation to every element ....

     External iterators are more flexible than internal iterators. It's easy to compare two collections for equality with an external iterator, for example, but it's practically impossible with internal iterators ... But on the other hand, internal iterators are easier to use, because they define the iteration logic for you.

     For an example of how internal iterators work, see Ruby's Enumerable API, which has internal iteration methods such as each. In Ruby, the idea is to pass a block of code (i.e. a closure) to an internal iterator so that a collection can take care of its own iteration.

     Other Answers

     Answered Oct 07, 2008 · 5 votes

     it is important to keep the collection apart from the pointer. the iterator points at a specific place in a collection, and thus is not an integral part of the collection. this way, for an instance, you can use several iterators over the same collection.

     the down-side of this seperation is that the iterator is not aware to changes made to the collection it iterates on. so you cannot change the collection's structure and expect the iterator to continue it's work without "complaints".

     Check all answers on Stack Overflow

     5/5

   Show moreShow less

3. People also ask

   Does the cheque truncation system work?

   • Yes, absolutely! One of the primary benefits of the Cheque Truncation System is its ability to accelerate the cheque clearance process. Instead of taking days, the CTS enables clearance within a few hours, allowing payees and drawers to access funds more quickly.

   What is Cheque Truncation System and how it benefits? - Enterslice

   enterslice.com/learning/cheque-truncation-system/

   See all results for this question

   What is Cheque Truncation System (CTS)?

   • It is a technology that seeks to eliminate the need for paper cheques to be physically transported from one bank to another during the clearing process. Many countries use CTS to streamline and improve the cheque-clearing process. It is commonly known as CTS. CTS stands for Cheque Truncation System (CTS). How does Cheque Truncation System work?

   Cheque Truncation System (CTS): Full Form, Working ... - GeeksforGeeks

   www.geeksforgeeks.org/cheque-truncation-system-cts-full-form-working-role-and-advantages/

   See all results for this question

   What are the benefits of grid based cheque truncation system?

   • With the implementation of grid-based Cheque Truncation System, cheque clearing process in general has gained speed and operational efficiency in addition to other benefits such as business process re-engineering, cost effectiveness, better service and adoption of cutting-edge technology.

   What is Cheque Truncation System? CTS Benefits and Highlights ... - Nel…

   www.nelito.com/blog/what-is-cheque-truncation-system-cts-benefits-and-highlights-of-cts-check.html

   See all results for this question

   Can a cheque be truncated?

   • Once the cheque has been turned into a digital document, it can be processed through the banking system just like any other electronic payment . Although technology needed to exist to enable cheque truncation, the laws related to cheques were the main impediment to its introduction.

   Cheque truncation - Wikipedia

   en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheque_truncation

   See all results for this question

4. www.geeksforgeeks.org › cheque-truncation-systemCheque Truncation System (CTS): Full Form ... - GeeksforGeeks

   www.geeksforgeeks.org › cheque-truncation-system

   • Cached

   Jan 17, 2024 · Advantages of Cheque Truncation System (CTS) Here are some advantages of CTS: 1. Faster Clearing and Settlement: One of the best things about CTS is that it shortens the time needed for clearing and settling cheques significantly.

5. vakilsearch.com › blog › cheque-truncation-systemCheque Truncation System: Benefits and Impacts - Vakil Search

   vakilsearch.com › blog › cheque-truncation-system

   • Cached

   Oct 31, 2023 · Benefits of the Cheque Truncation System Speedier Clearing: CTS speeds up the process of cheque clearance, payment, and receipt of funds. While traditionally cheques could take several days to clear, with CTS, it can be done within a day.

6. enterslice.com › learning › cheque-truncation-systemWhat is Cheque Truncation System and how it benefits ...

   enterslice.com › learning › cheque-truncation-system

   • Cached

   • What Is Cheque Truncation?
   • How Does It Work?
   • Benefits of The CTS
   • CTS Implementation Challenges
   • Introduction of Cheque Truncation System (CTS) in India
   • New Approach to Cheque Truncation System (CTS) Implementation in India
   • Status of CTS Implementation in India
   • Conclusion

   The Cheque Truncation System (CTS) is an online image-based cheque-clearing system introduced by the RBI in 2010. It replaces the traditional physical movement of cheques for clearance and settlement purposes. Under the CTS, the entire process of cheque clearance is electronic and image-based, significantly reducing the time and effort involved in ...

   See full list on enterslice.com

   Cheque Scanning:The first step in the CTS process involves capturing cheque images. Banks and financial institutions use high-resolution scanners to capture the image of both sides of the cheque, e...

   Data Transmission:Once the cheque images are captured, they are encrypted and securely transmitted to the Clearing House for processing. The Clearing House acts as an intermediary, facilitating the...

   Data Verification:The electronic images are verified for quality and compliance with the CTS guidelines at the Clearing House. Any discrepancies or errors are flagged and returned to the respective...

   Data Exchange:The Clearing House redistributes the verified cheque images to the respective banks for further processing. The images are matched against the data stored in the banks’ systems.

   See full list on enterslice.com

   Faster Clearing:The CTS reduces the time taken for cheque clearance from days to just a few hours, enabling quicker access to funds for both the payee and the drawer.

   Enhanced Security:Electronic images ensure that the cheque does not physically move through multiple hands, minimizing the risk of loss or theft.

   Reduction in Fraud:The CTS employs advanced security features like digital signatures, preventing alterations and counterfeit cheques, thus reducing the chances of fraudulent activities.

   Cost-Effectiveness:By eliminating the need for physical transportation and manual processing, the CTS reduces operational costs for banks and financial institutions.

   See full list on enterslice.com

   While the Cheque Truncation System has been a remarkable advancement for India’s banking sector, its implementation did present some challenges. The initial costs of adopting new technology and training staff were significant for some smaller banks. Additionally, ensuring a seamless transition from the traditional cheque-clearing system to the CTS ...

   See full list on enterslice.com

   With ten pilot banks,RBI first introduced this system in the National Capital Region of India and New Delhi on 1 February 2008. The deadline was set as 30thApril 2008 for all the banks to acquire this system. After this, it was launched in Chennai on 24tn September 2011. Before introducing the Cheque Truncation System, instruments were used to get ...

   See full list on enterslice.com

   As mentioned above, a new approach called the Grid-based approach has been introduced. The entire cheque volume of the country is now consolidated into three grids in New Delhi, Chennai and Mumbai. Each grid provides processing and clearing services to all the banks under its respective jurisdiction. Banks, branches and customers based at small/rem...

   See full list on enterslice.com

   CTS has been implemented in New Delhi, Chennai and Mumbai from February 1, 2008, September 24, 2011, and April 27, 2013, respectively. The traditional MICR-based cheque processing has been discontinued nationwide after migrating the entire cheque volume from the MICR system to CTS.

   See full list on enterslice.com

   The Cheque Truncation System (CTS) has undoubtedly revolutionized the cheque clearance process in India, making it more efficient, secure, and cost-effective. The CTS has established a more streamlined and modernized banking ecosystem by embracing digital technologyand reducing manual intervention. As India continues its journey towards a cashless ...

   See full list on enterslice.com

7. Videos

   • 

     2:51

     youtube.com

     Understanding Cheque Truncation System

     May 6, 2021

     566 Views

   • 

     17:13

     youtube.com

     Part 2 - How to implement a Queue in Java - Enqueue Operation

     Nov 7, 2017

     22.3K Views

   • 

     2:07

     youtube.com

     Cheque Truncation system CTS in details

     Sep 20, 2022

     29.2K Views

   View all

8. mrunal.org › 2012 › 10Explained: Cheque Truncation System CTS-features, benefits

   mrunal.org › 2012 › 10

   Oct 22, 2012 · What are the benefits of Cheque Truncation? It Eliminates the time, money and manpower wasted during physical movement of cheques (from banks to clearing house). Thus, Cheque Truncation =faster clearing = better service to customers, Cheque Truncation system reduces the scope for clearing-related frauds; There is no fear of losing cheque in ...

9. en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Cheque_truncationCheque truncation - Wikipedia

   en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Cheque_truncation

   • Cached

   Cheque truncation reduces or eliminates the physical movement of paper cheques and reduces the time and cost of cheque clearance. Cheque truncation also offers the potential reduction in settlement periods with the electronic processing of the cheque payment system . History.

10. www.nelito.com › blog › what-is-cheque-truncationWhat is Cheque Truncation System? CTS Benefits and ... - Nelito

    www.nelito.com › blog › what-is-cheque-truncation

    • Cached

    Benefits of Cheque Truncation System. Time, money and manpower expended on physical transfer of cheques from banks to clearing house are eliminated; Clearing related frauds become less plausible; Probability of cheques misplaced in transit is eliminated; CTS is more advanced and more secure. It provides quicker clearance of cheques

11. www.jems.net.in › wp-content › uploadsCheque Truncation System (Cts): An Overview - JEMS

    www.jems.net.in › wp-content › uploads

    As explained above, Cheque Truncation speeds up the process of collection of cheques resulting in better service to customers, reduces the scope for clearing-related frauds or loss of instruments in transit, lowers the cost of collection of cheques, and removes reconciliation-related and logistics-related problems, thus benefitting the system as...