I have a class called Athlete which is a sublass of Human. In the class Human I implement the interface comparable and use the method compareTo in order to compare the ages of different athletes. In the athletes class I have an extra field called year which corresponds to the year the athlete started competing. In my main method in my program I have an arraylist that I add both Athletes and Humans. I would like to so that if an athlete is of the same age to sort according to the year the athlete started competing. I use instanceof to check in my class human if the instance is the object is of type Athlete but after that I don't know how to get it to work.
public int compareTo(Human other)
{
if(this instanceof Athlete && other instanceof Athlete && this.age == other.age){
return ;
}
return this.age - other.age;
}
}
One possible solution is to add a compareTo method in the Athlete class also, something in the lines of (needs rewriting as I haven't been working on Java since a long time ago):
public int compareTo(Athlete other){
int result = super.compareTo((Human)other);
if(result == 0){
return this.year - other.year;
}
return result;
}
As a code review, I'd say that the complete code should be something like the following:
Human.java
public int compareTo(Human other){
return age - other.age;
}
Athlete.java
#Override
public int compareTo(Human other){
if(other instanceof Athlete){
return compareTo((Athlete)other);
}
return super.compareTo(other);
}
public int compareTo(Athlete other){
int result = super.compareTo((Human)other);
if(result == 0){
return this.year - other.year;
}
return result;
}
Use polymorphism, instead of the operator instanceof.
That is: overload the compareTo method in the Athlete class.
public int compareTo(Athlete other) {
//This method will be invoked if and only if you compare an athlete with another athlete
}
Also, consider that the equals method result should be consistent with the compareTo method results.
Using your example, you could just compare the year as well:
public int compareTo(Human other)
{
if(this instanceof Athlete && other instanceof Athlete && this.age == other.age){
String tYear = ((Athlete)this).getYear();
String oYear = ((Athlete)other).getYear();
int tYearInt = 0;
int oYearInt = 0;
try {
tYearInt = Integer.parseInt(tYear);
oYearInt = Integer.parseInt(oYear);
} catch (Exception e){
e.printStackTrace();
}
return tYearInt - oYearInt;
}
return this.age - other.age;
}
However, having said that, please consider #Andres answer, anytime you use instanceof, you should question whether your design is wrong.
Like Andres said, use polymorphism. Here is how to do that:
First of all, this instanceof Athlete in the Human class is not good style, because from the perspective of the Human class, Athlete is a subclass and referencing subclasses can lead to problems in certain cases. Instead, put another compareTo() method into the Athlete class. If Athlete.compareTo() gets called, you already know that this is of type Athlete and if you want to compare the year field, you only have to check if other instanceof Athlete, which is ok, because now we are in the perspective of the Athlete class and from here, Athlete is not a subclass.
That said, in the Athlete class, use this:
public int compareTo(Human other) {
int humanComp = super.compareTo(other);
if (humanComp != 0){
return humanComp;
}
if (other instanceof Athlete) {
return ((Athlete)other).year - this.year;
}
return 0;
}
This solution first uses Human.compareTo() (called with super.compareTo(other)) to check if the Human class already knows how to order our instances this and other. If not, i.e. if this call returns 0, we have to go on with comparing more details, in our case the year field.
Because we used Human.compareTo(), we have to make sure it exists in the Human class and that it works properly:
public int compareTo(Human other) {
return this.age - other.age;
}
This one simply compares by age, because that's the only field in the Human class we know we can use for comparison.
The documentation for compareTo says:
Finally, the implementor must ensure that x.compareTo(y)==0 implies that sgn(x.compareTo(z)) == sgn(y.compareTo(z)), for all z.
Your proposed method does not meet this requirement. For example, suppose
x = Athlete, age = 35, start date = 2000
y = Human, age = 35
z = Athlete, age = 35, start date = 2001
In this example
x.compareTo(y) == 0 // y is not an athlete
x.compareTo(z) < 0 // Both athletes, different start dates.
y.compareTo(z) == 0 // y is not an athlete
If you do not obey the contract for Comparable, the behaviour of Arrays.sort or Collections.sort is unspecified. Ideally you'd get an exception, but the trouble is these sorting methods use different algorithms depending on the size of the array or list, and you are more likely to get an exception thrown for an incorrect compareTo method if the input array or list has a large number of elements. This means that you should test your compareTo method very carefully using long randomly generated arrays, otherwise you may have subtle, hard-to-detect bugs in your code.
A correct compareTo method looks something like this:
public int compareTo(Human other) {
int result = Integer.compare(age, other.age);
if (result != 0)
return result;
if (!(this instanceof Athlete))
return other instanceof Athlete ? -1 : 0;
return other instanceof Athlete
? Long.compare(((Athlete) this).startDate(), ((Athlete) other).startDate())
: 1;
}
This method sorts first by age. If two humans have the same age they are sorted first by type (with athletes coming first). Athletes with the same age are sorted by start date. Non-athletes with the same age do not appear in any particular order.
Finally, note that it is generally better to use polymorphism rather than instanceof. The problem here is that Human implements Comparable<Human>. Therefore the compareTo method must accept a Human, not an Athlete. Even if you override compareTo in Athlete, the argument must be a Human, and you'd have to use instanceof to check the type of the argument anyway (as in #GentianKasa's answer) or write a completely separate method compareToAthlete(Athlete athlete) and do the following in Athlete
#Override
public int compareTo(Human human) {
return -human.compareToAthlete(this); // Note the minus sign!
}
compareToAthlete would need two versions as well. While this works, it means that the logic of the compareTo method is spread over four methods, making it harder to reason about its correctness. In this case, I'd hold my nose and use instanceof.
Related
For instance, I have an arraylist called StudentListA and StudentListB that contains many students.
StudentListA = {Student 1, Student 2, Student 3....}
StudentListB = {Student A, Student B, Student C....}
In each student, they have their own attributes such as name, address, gpa etc.
How do I compare if Student 1 has the same attribute value with Student A, and so on.
For now I am thinking of something like this:
int i = 0;
for (Student student : StudentListA){
if(student.getName().equals(studentListB.get(i).getName() &&
student.getAddress().equals(studentListB.get(i).getAddress()....){
//Do smtg
}
i++;
}
Is there an easier way to do this? Because I have quite a handful of attributes. I want to know if the first and second list have the exact same students or not.
You should move comparison of attributes to Student#equals method.
Then you will use Student#equals in the cycle:
for (Student student : StudentListA){
if(student.equals(studentListB.get(i))){
//Do smtg
}
i++;
}
You can look at Lombock EqualsAndHashCode - it would be easiest way to generate the #equals method.
If you aren't allowed to use lombock, then you will have to write the Student#equals yourself.
In real world it's rare to write implementation for #equals because IDE can help you to generate it. E.g. this is what Idea generated for me:
public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (this == o) return true;
if (o == null || getClass() != o.getClass()) return false;
Student student = (Student) o;
if (this.name != null ? !name.equals(student.name) : student.name != null) return false;
return true;
}
Is there an easier way to do this? Because I have quite a handful of attributes.
There is no shortcut in Java itself for testing whether two distinct objects have all corresponding attributes equal to each other. You can, however, write a method that performs such a test, so that you can reuse it, and so that your code is better factored. You can also choose that as your definition of value equality for objects of a given type, by making the method implementing that comparison an override of Object.equals().
If you do override Object.equals() then be sure to override Object.hashcode() as well, to maintain consistency with equals(). Objects that test equal to each other should have the same hash code, though the reverse is not necessarily true.
As suggested in other post, Key implementation is to override equals and hashCode, that is must. This can be easily done code generation using IDE/eclipse.
Implements the java.lang.Comparable interface
Override the compareTo method
//sample implementation,
public int compareTo(Student o){
if (o.hashCode() < this.hashCode()){return -1}
else if(o.hashCode() > this.hashCode()) {return 1}
return 0;
}
Use Collections.sort for sorting
Now you have two sorted list, you can use easily compare two sorted list.
I am trying to override equals method in Java. I have a class People which basically has 2 data fields name and age. Now I want to override equals method so that I can check between 2 People objects.
My code is as follows
public boolean equals(People other){
boolean result;
if((other == null) || (getClass() != other.getClass())){
result = false;
} // end if
else{
People otherPeople = (People)other;
result = name.equals(other.name) && age.equals(other.age);
} // end else
return result;
} // end equals
But when I write age.equals(other.age) it gives me error as equals method can only compare String and age is Integer.
Solution
I used == operator as suggested and my problem is solved.
//Written by K#stackoverflow
public class Main {
/**
* #param args the command line arguments
*/
public static void main(String[] args) {
// TODO code application logic here
ArrayList<Person> people = new ArrayList<Person>();
people.add(new Person("Subash Adhikari", 28));
people.add(new Person("K", 28));
people.add(new Person("StackOverflow", 4));
people.add(new Person("Subash Adhikari", 28));
for (int i = 0; i < people.size() - 1; i++) {
for (int y = i + 1; y <= people.size() - 1; y++) {
boolean check = people.get(i).equals(people.get(y));
System.out.println("-- " + people.get(i).getName() + " - VS - " + people.get(y).getName());
System.out.println(check);
}
}
}
}
//written by K#stackoverflow
public class Person {
private String name;
private int age;
public Person(String name, int age){
this.name = name;
this.age = age;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (obj == null) {
return false;
}
if (obj.getClass() != this.getClass()) {
return false;
}
final Person other = (Person) obj;
if ((this.name == null) ? (other.name != null) : !this.name.equals(other.name)) {
return false;
}
if (this.age != other.age) {
return false;
}
return true;
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
int hash = 3;
hash = 53 * hash + (this.name != null ? this.name.hashCode() : 0);
hash = 53 * hash + this.age;
return hash;
}
public int getAge() {
return age;
}
public void setAge(int age) {
this.age = age;
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public void setName(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
}
Output:
run:
-- Subash Adhikari - VS - K false
-- Subash Adhikari - VS - StackOverflow false
-- Subash Adhikari - VS - Subash Adhikari true
-- K - VS - StackOverflow false
-- K - VS - Subash Adhikari false
-- StackOverflow - VS - Subash Adhikari false
-- BUILD SUCCESSFUL (total time: 0 seconds)
Introducing a new method signature that changes the parameter types is called overloading:
public boolean equals(People other){
Here People is different than Object.
When a method signature remains the identical to that of its superclass, it is called overriding and the #Override annotation helps distinguish the two at compile-time:
#Override
public boolean equals(Object other){
Without seeing the actual declaration of age, it is difficult to say why the error appears.
I'm not sure of the details as you haven't posted the whole code, but:
remember to override hashCode() as well
the equals method should have Object, not People as its argument type. At the moment you are overloading, not overriding, the equals method, which probably isn't what you want, especially given that you check its type later.
you can use instanceof to check it is a People object e.g. if (!(other instanceof People)) { result = false;}
equals is used for all objects, but not primitives. I think you mean age is an int (primitive), in which case just use ==. Note that an Integer (with a capital 'I') is an Object which should be compared with equals.
See What issues should be considered when overriding equals and hashCode in Java? for more details.
Item 10: Obey the general contract when overriding equals
According to Effective Java, Overriding the equals method seems simple, but there are many ways to get it wrong, and consequences can be dire. The easiest way to avoid problems is not to override the equals method, in which case each instance of the class is equal only to itself. This is the right thing to do if any of the following conditions apply:
Each instance of the class is inherently unique. This is true for classes such as Thread that represent active entities rather than values. The equals implementation provided by Object has exactly the right behavior for these classes.
There is no need for the class to provide a “logical equality” test. For example, java.util.regex.Pattern could have overridden equals to check whether two Pattern instances represented exactly the same regular expression, but the designers didn’t think that clients would need or want this functionality. Under these circumstances, the equals implementation inherited from Object is ideal.
A superclass has already overridden equals, and the superclass behavior is appropriate for this class. For example, most Set implementations inherit their equals implementation from AbstractSet, List implementations from AbstractList, and Map implementations from AbstractMap.
The class is private or package-private, and you are certain that its equals method will never be invoked. If you are extremely risk-averse, you can override the equals method to ensure that it isn’t invoked accidentally:
The equals method implements an equivalence relation. It has these properties:
Reflexive: For any non-null reference value x, x.equals(x) must return true.
Symmetric: For any non-null reference values x and y, x.equals(y) must return true if and only if y.equals(x) returns true.
Transitive: For any non-null reference values x, y, z, if x.equals(y) returns true and y.equals(z) returns true, then x.equals(z) must return true.
Consistent: For any non-null reference values x and y, multiple invocations of x.equals(y) must consistently return true or consistently return false, provided no information used in equals comparisons is modified.
For any non-null reference value x, x.equals(null) must return false.
Here’s a recipe for a high-quality equals method:
Use the == operator to check if the argument is a reference to this object. If so, return true. This is just a performance optimization but one that is worth doing if the comparison is potentially expensive.
Use the instanceof operator to check if the argument has the correct type. If not, return false. Typically, the correct type is the class in which the method occurs. Occasionally, it is some interface implemented by this class. Use an interface if the class implements an interface that refines the equals contract to permit comparisons across classes that implement the interface. Collection interfaces such as Set, List, Map, and Map.Entry have this property.
Cast the argument to the correct type. Because this cast was preceded by an instanceof test, it is guaranteed to succeed.
For each “significant” field in the class, check if that field of the argument matches the corresponding field of this object. If all these tests succeed, return true; otherwise, return false. If the type in Step 2 is an interface, you must access the argument’s fields via interface methods; if the type is a class, you may be able to access the fields directly, depending on their accessibility.
For primitive fields whose type is not float or double, use the == operator for comparisons; for object reference fields, call the equals method recursively; for float fields, use the static Float.compare(float, float) method; and for double fields, use Double.compare(double, double). The special treatment of float and double fields is made necessary by the existence of Float.NaN, -0.0f and the analogous double values; While you could compare float and double fields with the static methods Float.equals and Double.equals, this would entail autoboxing on every comparison, which would have poor performance. For array fields, apply these guidelines to each element. If every element in an array field is significant, use one of the Arrays.equals methods.
Some object reference fields may legitimately contain null. To avoid the possibility of a NullPointerException, check such fields for equality using the static method Objects.equals(Object, Object).
// Class with a typical equals method
public final class PhoneNumber {
private final short areaCode, prefix, lineNum;
public PhoneNumber(int areaCode, int prefix, int lineNum) {
this.areaCode = rangeCheck(areaCode, 999, "area code");
this.prefix = rangeCheck(prefix, 999, "prefix");
this.lineNum = rangeCheck(lineNum, 9999, "line num");
}
private static short rangeCheck(int val, int max, String arg) {
if (val < 0 || val > max)
throw new IllegalArgumentException(arg + ": " + val);
return (short) val;
}
#Override public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (o == this)
return true;
if (!(o instanceof PhoneNumber))
return false;
PhoneNumber pn = (PhoneNumber)o;
return pn.lineNum == lineNum && pn.prefix == prefix
&& pn.areaCode == areaCode;
}
... // Remainder omitted
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object that){
if(this == that) return true;//if both of them points the same address in memory
if(!(that instanceof People)) return false; // if "that" is not a People or a childclass
People thatPeople = (People)that; // than we can cast it to People safely
return this.name.equals(thatPeople.name) && this.age == thatPeople.age;// if they have the same name and same age, then the 2 objects are equal unless they're pointing to different memory adresses
}
When comparing objects in Java, you make a semantic check, comparing the type and identifying state of the objects to:
itself (same instance)
itself (clone, or reconstructed copy)
other objects of different types
other objects of the same type
null
Rules:
Symmetry: a.equals(b) == b.equals(a)
equals() always yields true or false, but never a NullpointerException, ClassCastException or any other throwable
Comparison:
Type check: both instances need to be of the same type, meaning you have to compare the actual classes for equality. This is often not correctly implemented, when developers use instanceof for type comparison (which only works as long as there are no subclasses, and violates the symmetry rule when A extends B -> a instanceof b != b instanceof a).
Semantic check of identifying state: Make sure you understand by which state the instances are identified. Persons may be identified by their social security number, but not by hair color (can be dyed), name (can be changed) or age (changes all the time). Only with value objects should you compare the full state (all non-transient fields), otherwise check only what identifies the instance.
For your Person class:
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
// same instance
if (obj == this) {
return true;
}
// null
if (obj == null) {
return false;
}
// type
if (!getClass().equals(obj.getClass())) {
return false;
}
// cast and compare state
Person other = (Person) obj;
return Objects.equals(name, other.name) && Objects.equals(age, other.age);
}
Reusable, generic utility class:
public final class Equals {
private Equals() {
// private constructor, no instances allowed
}
/**
* Convenience equals implementation, does the object equality, null and type checking, and comparison of the identifying state
*
* #param instance object instance (where the equals() is implemented)
* #param other other instance to compare to
* #param stateAccessors stateAccessors for state to compare, optional
* #param <T> instance type
* #return true when equals, false otherwise
*/
public static <T> boolean as(T instance, Object other, Function<? super T, Object>... stateAccessors) {
if (instance == null) {
return other == null;
}
if (instance == other) {
return true;
}
if (other == null) {
return false;
}
if (!instance.getClass().equals(other.getClass())) {
return false;
}
if (stateAccessors == null) {
return true;
}
return Stream.of(stateAccessors).allMatch(s -> Objects.equals(s.apply(instance), s.apply((T) other)));
}
}
For your Person class, using this utility class:
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
return Equals.as(this, obj, t -> t.name, t -> t.age);
}
Since I'm guessing age is of type int:
public boolean equals(Object other){
boolean result;
if((other == null) || (getClass() != other.getClass())){
result = false;
} // end if
else{
People otherPeople = (People)other;
result = name.equals(otherPeople.name) && age == otherPeople.age;
} // end else
return result;
} // end equals
if age is int you should use == if it is Integer object then you can use equals().
You also need to implement hashcode method if you override equals. Details of the contract is available in the javadoc of Object and also at various pages in web.
tl;dr
record Person ( String name , int age ) {}
if(
new Person( "Carol" , 27 ) // Compiler auto-generates implicitly the constructor.
.equals( // Compiler auto-generates implicitly the `equals` method.
new Person( "Carol" , 42 )
)
) // Returns `false`, as the name matches but the age differs.
{ … }
Details
While your specific problem is solved (using == for equality test between int primitive values), there is an alternative that eliminates the need to write that code.
record
Java 16 brings the record feature.
A record is a brief way to write a class whose main purpose is to transparently and immutably carry data. The compiler implicitly creates the constructor, getters, equals & hashCode, and toString.
equals method provided automatically
The default implicit equals method compares each and every member field that you declared for the record. The members can be objects or primitives, both types are automatically compared in the default equals method.
For example, if you have a Person record carrying two fields, name & age, both of those fields are automatically compared to determine equality between a pair of Person objects.
public record Person ( String name , int age ) {}
Try it.
Person alice = new Person( "Alice" , 23 ) ;
Person alice2 = new Person( "Alice" , 23 ) ;
Person bob = new Person( "Bob" , 19 ) ;
boolean samePerson1 = alice.equals( alice2 ) ; // true.
boolean samePerson2 = alice.equals( bob ) ; // false.
You can override the equals method on a record, if you want a behavior other than the default. But if you do override equals, be sure to override hashCode for consistent logic, as you would for a conventional Java class. And, think twice: Whenever adding methods to a record, reconsider if a record structure is really appropriate to that problem domain.
Tip: A record can be defined within another class, and even locally within a method.
Here is the solution that I recently used:
public class Test {
public String a;
public long b;
public Date c;
public String d;
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (this == obj) {
return true;
}
if (!(obj instanceof Test)) {
return false;
}
Test testOther = (Test) obj;
return (a != null ? a.equals(testOther.a) : testOther.a == null)
&& (b == testOther.b)
&& (c != null ? c.equals(testOther.c) : testOther.c == null)
&& (d != null ? d.equals(testOther.d) : testOther.d == null);
}
}
For lazy programmers: lombok library is very easy and time saving. please have a look at this link
instead of writing lines of codes and rules, you just need to apply this library in your IDE and then just #Data and it is Done.
import lombok.Data;
#Data // this is the magic word :D
public class pojo {
int price;
String currency;
String productName;
}
in fact in the above code, #Data is a shortcut for
import lombok.Data;
import lombok.EqualsAndHashCode;
import lombok.Getter;
import lombok.Setter;
import lombok.ToString;
#Getter
#Setter
#EqualsAndHashCode
#ToString
//or instead of all above #Data
public class pojo {
int price;
String currency;
String productName;
}
I am trying to override equals method in Java. I have a class People which basically has 2 data fields name and age. Now I want to override equals method so that I can check between 2 People objects.
My code is as follows
public boolean equals(People other){
boolean result;
if((other == null) || (getClass() != other.getClass())){
result = false;
} // end if
else{
People otherPeople = (People)other;
result = name.equals(other.name) && age.equals(other.age);
} // end else
return result;
} // end equals
But when I write age.equals(other.age) it gives me error as equals method can only compare String and age is Integer.
Solution
I used == operator as suggested and my problem is solved.
//Written by K#stackoverflow
public class Main {
/**
* #param args the command line arguments
*/
public static void main(String[] args) {
// TODO code application logic here
ArrayList<Person> people = new ArrayList<Person>();
people.add(new Person("Subash Adhikari", 28));
people.add(new Person("K", 28));
people.add(new Person("StackOverflow", 4));
people.add(new Person("Subash Adhikari", 28));
for (int i = 0; i < people.size() - 1; i++) {
for (int y = i + 1; y <= people.size() - 1; y++) {
boolean check = people.get(i).equals(people.get(y));
System.out.println("-- " + people.get(i).getName() + " - VS - " + people.get(y).getName());
System.out.println(check);
}
}
}
}
//written by K#stackoverflow
public class Person {
private String name;
private int age;
public Person(String name, int age){
this.name = name;
this.age = age;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (obj == null) {
return false;
}
if (obj.getClass() != this.getClass()) {
return false;
}
final Person other = (Person) obj;
if ((this.name == null) ? (other.name != null) : !this.name.equals(other.name)) {
return false;
}
if (this.age != other.age) {
return false;
}
return true;
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
int hash = 3;
hash = 53 * hash + (this.name != null ? this.name.hashCode() : 0);
hash = 53 * hash + this.age;
return hash;
}
public int getAge() {
return age;
}
public void setAge(int age) {
this.age = age;
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public void setName(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
}
Output:
run:
-- Subash Adhikari - VS - K false
-- Subash Adhikari - VS - StackOverflow false
-- Subash Adhikari - VS - Subash Adhikari true
-- K - VS - StackOverflow false
-- K - VS - Subash Adhikari false
-- StackOverflow - VS - Subash Adhikari false
-- BUILD SUCCESSFUL (total time: 0 seconds)
Introducing a new method signature that changes the parameter types is called overloading:
public boolean equals(People other){
Here People is different than Object.
When a method signature remains the identical to that of its superclass, it is called overriding and the #Override annotation helps distinguish the two at compile-time:
#Override
public boolean equals(Object other){
Without seeing the actual declaration of age, it is difficult to say why the error appears.
I'm not sure of the details as you haven't posted the whole code, but:
remember to override hashCode() as well
the equals method should have Object, not People as its argument type. At the moment you are overloading, not overriding, the equals method, which probably isn't what you want, especially given that you check its type later.
you can use instanceof to check it is a People object e.g. if (!(other instanceof People)) { result = false;}
equals is used for all objects, but not primitives. I think you mean age is an int (primitive), in which case just use ==. Note that an Integer (with a capital 'I') is an Object which should be compared with equals.
See What issues should be considered when overriding equals and hashCode in Java? for more details.
Item 10: Obey the general contract when overriding equals
According to Effective Java, Overriding the equals method seems simple, but there are many ways to get it wrong, and consequences can be dire. The easiest way to avoid problems is not to override the equals method, in which case each instance of the class is equal only to itself. This is the right thing to do if any of the following conditions apply:
Each instance of the class is inherently unique. This is true for classes such as Thread that represent active entities rather than values. The equals implementation provided by Object has exactly the right behavior for these classes.
There is no need for the class to provide a “logical equality” test. For example, java.util.regex.Pattern could have overridden equals to check whether two Pattern instances represented exactly the same regular expression, but the designers didn’t think that clients would need or want this functionality. Under these circumstances, the equals implementation inherited from Object is ideal.
A superclass has already overridden equals, and the superclass behavior is appropriate for this class. For example, most Set implementations inherit their equals implementation from AbstractSet, List implementations from AbstractList, and Map implementations from AbstractMap.
The class is private or package-private, and you are certain that its equals method will never be invoked. If you are extremely risk-averse, you can override the equals method to ensure that it isn’t invoked accidentally:
The equals method implements an equivalence relation. It has these properties:
Reflexive: For any non-null reference value x, x.equals(x) must return true.
Symmetric: For any non-null reference values x and y, x.equals(y) must return true if and only if y.equals(x) returns true.
Transitive: For any non-null reference values x, y, z, if x.equals(y) returns true and y.equals(z) returns true, then x.equals(z) must return true.
Consistent: For any non-null reference values x and y, multiple invocations of x.equals(y) must consistently return true or consistently return false, provided no information used in equals comparisons is modified.
For any non-null reference value x, x.equals(null) must return false.
Here’s a recipe for a high-quality equals method:
Use the == operator to check if the argument is a reference to this object. If so, return true. This is just a performance optimization but one that is worth doing if the comparison is potentially expensive.
Use the instanceof operator to check if the argument has the correct type. If not, return false. Typically, the correct type is the class in which the method occurs. Occasionally, it is some interface implemented by this class. Use an interface if the class implements an interface that refines the equals contract to permit comparisons across classes that implement the interface. Collection interfaces such as Set, List, Map, and Map.Entry have this property.
Cast the argument to the correct type. Because this cast was preceded by an instanceof test, it is guaranteed to succeed.
For each “significant” field in the class, check if that field of the argument matches the corresponding field of this object. If all these tests succeed, return true; otherwise, return false. If the type in Step 2 is an interface, you must access the argument’s fields via interface methods; if the type is a class, you may be able to access the fields directly, depending on their accessibility.
For primitive fields whose type is not float or double, use the == operator for comparisons; for object reference fields, call the equals method recursively; for float fields, use the static Float.compare(float, float) method; and for double fields, use Double.compare(double, double). The special treatment of float and double fields is made necessary by the existence of Float.NaN, -0.0f and the analogous double values; While you could compare float and double fields with the static methods Float.equals and Double.equals, this would entail autoboxing on every comparison, which would have poor performance. For array fields, apply these guidelines to each element. If every element in an array field is significant, use one of the Arrays.equals methods.
Some object reference fields may legitimately contain null. To avoid the possibility of a NullPointerException, check such fields for equality using the static method Objects.equals(Object, Object).
// Class with a typical equals method
public final class PhoneNumber {
private final short areaCode, prefix, lineNum;
public PhoneNumber(int areaCode, int prefix, int lineNum) {
this.areaCode = rangeCheck(areaCode, 999, "area code");
this.prefix = rangeCheck(prefix, 999, "prefix");
this.lineNum = rangeCheck(lineNum, 9999, "line num");
}
private static short rangeCheck(int val, int max, String arg) {
if (val < 0 || val > max)
throw new IllegalArgumentException(arg + ": " + val);
return (short) val;
}
#Override public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (o == this)
return true;
if (!(o instanceof PhoneNumber))
return false;
PhoneNumber pn = (PhoneNumber)o;
return pn.lineNum == lineNum && pn.prefix == prefix
&& pn.areaCode == areaCode;
}
... // Remainder omitted
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object that){
if(this == that) return true;//if both of them points the same address in memory
if(!(that instanceof People)) return false; // if "that" is not a People or a childclass
People thatPeople = (People)that; // than we can cast it to People safely
return this.name.equals(thatPeople.name) && this.age == thatPeople.age;// if they have the same name and same age, then the 2 objects are equal unless they're pointing to different memory adresses
}
When comparing objects in Java, you make a semantic check, comparing the type and identifying state of the objects to:
itself (same instance)
itself (clone, or reconstructed copy)
other objects of different types
other objects of the same type
null
Rules:
Symmetry: a.equals(b) == b.equals(a)
equals() always yields true or false, but never a NullpointerException, ClassCastException or any other throwable
Comparison:
Type check: both instances need to be of the same type, meaning you have to compare the actual classes for equality. This is often not correctly implemented, when developers use instanceof for type comparison (which only works as long as there are no subclasses, and violates the symmetry rule when A extends B -> a instanceof b != b instanceof a).
Semantic check of identifying state: Make sure you understand by which state the instances are identified. Persons may be identified by their social security number, but not by hair color (can be dyed), name (can be changed) or age (changes all the time). Only with value objects should you compare the full state (all non-transient fields), otherwise check only what identifies the instance.
For your Person class:
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
// same instance
if (obj == this) {
return true;
}
// null
if (obj == null) {
return false;
}
// type
if (!getClass().equals(obj.getClass())) {
return false;
}
// cast and compare state
Person other = (Person) obj;
return Objects.equals(name, other.name) && Objects.equals(age, other.age);
}
Reusable, generic utility class:
public final class Equals {
private Equals() {
// private constructor, no instances allowed
}
/**
* Convenience equals implementation, does the object equality, null and type checking, and comparison of the identifying state
*
* #param instance object instance (where the equals() is implemented)
* #param other other instance to compare to
* #param stateAccessors stateAccessors for state to compare, optional
* #param <T> instance type
* #return true when equals, false otherwise
*/
public static <T> boolean as(T instance, Object other, Function<? super T, Object>... stateAccessors) {
if (instance == null) {
return other == null;
}
if (instance == other) {
return true;
}
if (other == null) {
return false;
}
if (!instance.getClass().equals(other.getClass())) {
return false;
}
if (stateAccessors == null) {
return true;
}
return Stream.of(stateAccessors).allMatch(s -> Objects.equals(s.apply(instance), s.apply((T) other)));
}
}
For your Person class, using this utility class:
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
return Equals.as(this, obj, t -> t.name, t -> t.age);
}
Since I'm guessing age is of type int:
public boolean equals(Object other){
boolean result;
if((other == null) || (getClass() != other.getClass())){
result = false;
} // end if
else{
People otherPeople = (People)other;
result = name.equals(otherPeople.name) && age == otherPeople.age;
} // end else
return result;
} // end equals
if age is int you should use == if it is Integer object then you can use equals().
You also need to implement hashcode method if you override equals. Details of the contract is available in the javadoc of Object and also at various pages in web.
tl;dr
record Person ( String name , int age ) {}
if(
new Person( "Carol" , 27 ) // Compiler auto-generates implicitly the constructor.
.equals( // Compiler auto-generates implicitly the `equals` method.
new Person( "Carol" , 42 )
)
) // Returns `false`, as the name matches but the age differs.
{ … }
Details
While your specific problem is solved (using == for equality test between int primitive values), there is an alternative that eliminates the need to write that code.
record
Java 16 brings the record feature.
A record is a brief way to write a class whose main purpose is to transparently and immutably carry data. The compiler implicitly creates the constructor, getters, equals & hashCode, and toString.
equals method provided automatically
The default implicit equals method compares each and every member field that you declared for the record. The members can be objects or primitives, both types are automatically compared in the default equals method.
For example, if you have a Person record carrying two fields, name & age, both of those fields are automatically compared to determine equality between a pair of Person objects.
public record Person ( String name , int age ) {}
Try it.
Person alice = new Person( "Alice" , 23 ) ;
Person alice2 = new Person( "Alice" , 23 ) ;
Person bob = new Person( "Bob" , 19 ) ;
boolean samePerson1 = alice.equals( alice2 ) ; // true.
boolean samePerson2 = alice.equals( bob ) ; // false.
You can override the equals method on a record, if you want a behavior other than the default. But if you do override equals, be sure to override hashCode for consistent logic, as you would for a conventional Java class. And, think twice: Whenever adding methods to a record, reconsider if a record structure is really appropriate to that problem domain.
Tip: A record can be defined within another class, and even locally within a method.
Here is the solution that I recently used:
public class Test {
public String a;
public long b;
public Date c;
public String d;
#Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (this == obj) {
return true;
}
if (!(obj instanceof Test)) {
return false;
}
Test testOther = (Test) obj;
return (a != null ? a.equals(testOther.a) : testOther.a == null)
&& (b == testOther.b)
&& (c != null ? c.equals(testOther.c) : testOther.c == null)
&& (d != null ? d.equals(testOther.d) : testOther.d == null);
}
}
For lazy programmers: lombok library is very easy and time saving. please have a look at this link
instead of writing lines of codes and rules, you just need to apply this library in your IDE and then just #Data and it is Done.
import lombok.Data;
#Data // this is the magic word :D
public class pojo {
int price;
String currency;
String productName;
}
in fact in the above code, #Data is a shortcut for
import lombok.Data;
import lombok.EqualsAndHashCode;
import lombok.Getter;
import lombok.Setter;
import lombok.ToString;
#Getter
#Setter
#EqualsAndHashCode
#ToString
//or instead of all above #Data
public class pojo {
int price;
String currency;
String productName;
}
I have several arrays in the form:
private static String[] patientNames = { "John Lennon", "Paul McCartney", "George Harrison", "Ringo Starr" };
Then I make a TreeSet like this:
TreeSet<Patient> patTreeSet = new TreeSet<Patient>();
Where Patient is a different class that makes "Patient" objects.
Then I loop through each element in my arrays to create several patients and add them to my patTreeSet like this:
for(int i = 0; i< patientNames.length; i++){
Date dob = date.getDate("MM/dd/yyyy", patientBirthDates[i]);
Patient p = new PatientImpl(patientNames[i], patientSSN[i], dob);
patTreeSet.add(p);
}
But when I go to check my patTreeSet.size() it only returns "1" - why is this?
I know my objects are working well because when I try to do the same thing but with ArrayList instead, everything works fine. So I'm guessing I'm using the TreeSet wrong.
If it helps, Patient has a method called getFirstName(), and when I try to do the following:
Iterator<Patient> patItr = patTreeSet.iterator();
while(patItr.hasNext()){
System.out.println(patItr.next().getFirstName());
}
Then only "John" prints, which obviously shouldn't be the case... So, am I totally misusing the TreeSet?
Thanks in advance for any help!
EDIT below
================PatientImpl Class====================
public class PatientImpl implements Patient, Comparable{
Calendar cal = new GregorianCalendar();
private String firstName;
private String lastName;
private String SSN;
private Date dob;
private int age;
private int thisID;
public static int ID = 0;
public PatientImpl(String fullName, String SSN, Date dob){
String[] name = fullName.split(" ");
firstName = name[0];
lastName = name[1];
this.SSN = SSN;
this.dob = dob;
thisID = ID += 1;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object p) {
//for some reason casting here and reassigning the value of p doesn't take care of the need to cast in the if statement...
p = (PatientImpl) p;
Boolean equal = false;
//make sure p is a patient before we even compare anything
if (p instanceof Patient) {
Patient temp = (Patient) p;
if (this.firstName.equalsIgnoreCase(temp.getFirstName())) {
if (this.lastName.equalsIgnoreCase(temp.getLastName())) {
if (this.SSN.equalsIgnoreCase(temp.getSSN())) {
if(this.dob.toString().equalsIgnoreCase(((PatientImpl) p).getDOB().toString())){
if(this.getID() == temp.getID()){
equal = true;
}
}
}
}
}
}
return equal;
}
and then all the getters are below, as well as the compareTo() method from the Comparable interface
If you put your objects in a TreeSet, you need to either provide an implementation of the Comparator interface in the constructor, or you need your objects to be of a class that implements Comparable.
You said you implement compareTo from the Comparable interface, but in your comment you say that you didn't, so am I correct in assuming that you just return 0; in the compareTo method? That would explain your problem, because TreeSet would then think that all your objects are 'the same' based on the compareTo method result.
Basically, in a TreeSet, your objects are maintained in a sorted order, and the sorting is determined by the outcome of the Comparable/Comparator method. This is used to quickly find duplicates in a TreeSet and has the added benefit that when you iterate over the TreeSet, you get the results in sorted order.
The Javadoc of TreeSet says:
Note that the ordering maintained by a set (whether or not an explicit
comparator is provided) must be consistent with equals if it is
to correctly implement the Set interface.
The easiest way to achieve that is to let your equals method call the compareTo method and check if the result is 0.
Given your PatientImpl class, I assume that you would want to sort patients first by their last name, then by their first name, and then by the rest of the fields in the class.
You could implement a compareTo method like this:
#Override
public int compareTo(Object o) {
if (!(o instanceof Patient))
return -1;
Patient temp = (Patient) o;
int r = this.lastName.compareToIgnoreCase(temp.getLastName());
if (r == 0)
r = this.firstName.compareToIgnoreCase(temp.getFirstName());
if (r == 0)
r = this.SSN.compareToIgnoreCase(temp.getSSN());
if (r == 0)
r = this.dob.toString().compareToIgnoreCase(temp.getDOB().toString());
if (r == 0)
r = Integer.compare(this.getID(), temp.getID());
return r;
}
I believe that would solve the problem you described.
I would advise you to read up (Javadoc or books) on TreeSet and HashSet and the importance of the equals, compareTo and hashCode methods.
If you want to put your objects in a Set or a Map, you need to know about these to implement that correctly.
Note
I based this compareTo method on your equals method.
You were comparing the date-of-birth by first calling toString. That's not a very good way of doing that - you can use the equals method in java.util.Date directly. In a compareTo method the problem gets worse because dates do not sort correctly when you sort them alphabetically.
java.util.Date also implements Comparable so you can replace that comparison in the method with:
if (r == 0)
r = this.dob.compareTo(temp.getDOB());
In addition, if any of the fields could be null, you need to check for that as well.
I am learning about arrays, and basically I have an array that collects a last name, first name, and score.
I need to write a compareTo method that will compare the last name and then the first name so the list could be sorted alphabetically starting with the last names, and then if two people have the same last name then it will sort the first name.
I'm confused, because all of the information in my book is comparing numbers, not objects and Strings.
Here is what I have coded so far. I know it's wrong but it at least explains what I think I'm doing:
public int compare(Object obj) // creating a method to compare
{
Student s = (Student) obj; // creating a student object
// I guess here I'm telling it to compare the last names?
int studentCompare = this.lastName.compareTo(s.getLastName());
if (studentCompare != 0)
return studentCompare;
else
{
if (this.getLastName() < s.getLastName())
return - 1;
if (this.getLastName() > s.getLastName())
return 1;
}
return 0;
}
I know the < and > symbols are wrong, but like I said my book only shows you how to use the compareTo.
This is the right way to compare strings:
int studentCompare = this.lastName.compareTo(s.getLastName());
This won't even compile:
if (this.getLastName() < s.getLastName())
Use
if (this.getLastName().compareTo(s.getLastName()) < 0) instead.
So to compare fist/last name order you need:
int d = getFirstName().compareTo(s.getFirstName());
if (d == 0)
d = getLastName().compareTo(s.getLastName());
return d;
The compareTo method is described as follows:
Compares this object with the specified object for order. Returns a
negative integer, zero, or a positive integer as this object is less
than, equal to, or greater than the specified object.
Let's say we would like to compare Jedis by their age:
class Jedi implements Comparable<Jedi> {
private final String name;
private final int age;
//...
}
Then if our Jedi is older than the provided one, you must return a positive, if they are the same age, you return 0, and if our Jedi is younger you return a negative.
public int compareTo(Jedi jedi){
return this.age > jedi.age ? 1 : this.age < jedi.age ? -1 : 0;
}
By implementing the compareTo method (coming from the Comparable interface) your are defining what is called a natural order. All sorting methods in JDK will use this ordering by default.
There are ocassions in which you may want to base your comparision in other objects, and not on a primitive type. For instance, copare Jedis based on their names. In this case, if the objects being compared already implement Comparable then you can do the comparison using its compareTo method.
public int compareTo(Jedi jedi){
return this.name.compareTo(jedi.getName());
}
It would be simpler in this case.
Now, if you inted to use both name and age as the comparison criteria then you have to decide your oder of comparison, what has precedence. For instance, if two Jedis are named the same, then you can use their age to decide which goes first and which goes second.
public int compareTo(Jedi jedi){
int result = this.name.compareTo(jedi.getName());
if(result == 0){
result = this.age > jedi.age ? 1 : this.age < jedi.age ? -1 : 0;
}
return result;
}
If you had an array of Jedis
Jedi[] jediAcademy = {new Jedi("Obiwan",80), new Jedi("Anakin", 30), ..}
All you have to do is to ask to the class java.util.Arrays to use its sort method.
Arrays.sort(jediAcademy);
This Arrays.sort method will use your compareTo method to sort the objects one by one.
Listen to #milkplusvellocet, I'd recommend you to implement the Comparable interface to your class as well.
Just contributing to the answers of others:
String.compareTo() will tell you how different a string is from another.
e.g. System.out.println( "Test".compareTo("Tesu") ); will print -1
and System.out.println( "Test".compareTo("Tesa") ); will print 19
and nerdy and geeky one-line solution to this task would be:
return this.lastName.equals(s.getLastName()) ? this.lastName.compareTo(s.getLastName()) : this.firstName.compareTo(s.getFirstName());
Explanation:
this.lastName.equals(s.getLastName()) checks whether lastnames are the same or not
this.lastName.compareTo(s.getLastName()) if yes, then returns comparison of last name.
this.firstName.compareTo(s.getFirstName()) if not, returns the comparison of first name.
You're almost all the way there.
Your first few lines, comparing the last name, are right on track. The compareTo() method on string will return a negative number for a string in alphabetical order before, and a positive number for one in alphabetical order after.
Now, you just need to do the same thing for your first name and score.
In other words, if Last Name 1 == Last Name 2, go on a check your first name next. If the first name is the same, check your score next. (Think about nesting your if/then blocks.)
Consider using the Comparator interface described here which uses generics so you can avoid casting Object to Student.
As Eugene Retunsky said, your first part is the correct way to compare Strings. Also if the lastNames are equal I think you meant to compare firstNames, in which case just use compareTo in the same way.
if (s.compareTo(t) > 0) will compare string s to string t and return the int value you want.
public int Compare(Object obj) // creating a method to compare {
Student s = (Student) obj; //creating a student object
// compare last names
return this.lastName.compareTo(s.getLastName());
}
Now just test for a positive negative return from the method as you would have normally.
Cheers
A String is an object in Java.
you could compare like so,
if(this.lastName.compareTo(s.getLastName() == 0)//last names are the same
I wouldn't have an Object type parameter, no point in casting it to Student if we know it will always be type Student.
As for an explanation, "result == 0" will only occur when the last names are identical, at which point we compare the first names and return that value instead.
public int Compare(Object obj)
{
Student student = (Student) obj;
int result = this.getLastName().compareTo( student.getLastName() );
if ( result == 0 )
{
result = this.getFirstName().compareTo( student.getFirstName() );
}
return result;
}
If you using compare To method of the Comparable interface in any class.
This can be used to arrange the string in Lexicographically.
public class Student() implements Comparable<Student>{
public int compareTo(Object obj){
if(this==obj){
return 0;
}
if(obj!=null){
String objName = ((Student)obj).getName();
return this.name.comapreTo.(objName);
}
}