This question already has answers here:
Semicolon at end of 'if' statement
(18 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
Just a general Java question. Why does the null variable exist? I'm working with some introduction to CS students and one of the most common mistakes is semi-colons where they are not supposed to be. For example
if(isTired());{
sleep(10);
}
The misplaced semi-colon before the open parenthesis keeps the if statement from working correctly, and I was wondering why the null line did in a Java program. In this example null seems to be a detriment and was wondering when someone would use it when coding.
The null statement is useful because there are some places in Java where you want to do nothing. They are not frequent, but they exist. Often they are the 'compulsory' statements that you have to put in as part of a construct. For example, if you want to write a for loop that only terminates on a 'break', then you want there to be nothing in the 'conditional' part of the for:
for (int i=0;;i++) {
int j = complexCalculation(i);
if (j<0 && complexCondition(j)) {
break;
}
}
If the null statement wasn't allowed, that wouldn't compile. If it was allowed there, but not in other places, that would be inconsistent (and make life more difficult for compiler writers).
The reality is that, once you get to be fairly proficient with the language, errors caused by accidentally adding null statements are rare.
Related
This question already has answers here:
How to write a ternary operator (aka if) expression without repeating yourself
(17 answers)
Is using Optional.ofNullable as a replacement for the ternary operator a good practice?
(6 answers)
Avoid violation of DRY with ternary?
(2 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
I'm fairly new to Java and I'm trying to check if a variable is null and use its value if its not. Previous developer wrote something like this:
xModel.setName(xService.getName(xID) != null ? xService.getName(xID) : "");
And I would like to refactor it so I wouldn't have to use xService twice to just get the name.
I know I can store the value beforehand but this is just an example. I just wonder if there is a way to do this in Java?
Thanks.
I disagree with all other answers. They require special functionality from specific versions by importing structures from the standard library, or obscure calls that works in this specific case, and all in all just hides the simplicity of what you're trying to do.
Keep it simple (KISS). Don't introduce more complexity and concepts when you don't need them. You're refactoring another developers code, which means this is a project where someone else will probably be reading your code later on. So keep it dead simple.
String name = xService.getName(xID);
xModel.setName(name != null ? name : "");
This is more readable than all other examples and doesn't require intimate knowledge of the standard library and its API.
Objects.toString( Object o, String nullDefault )
In this particular case you can use java.util.Objects.toString. Second argument is a default value to use in case of a null in the first argument.
xModel.setName(Objects.toString(xService.getName(x.ID), ""));
What you have is already the best core Java can do pre Java 8. From 8 onwards, you may use optionals:
xModel.setName(Optional.ofNullable(xService.getName(xID)).orElse(""));
This question already has answers here:
If statement executing all conditions
(9 answers)
Closed 4 years ago.
Got a basic if statement question, so I have an if statement in Java as shown here:
if (
!isOmitted(word,map.get(word.length()+1)) &&
!isInserted(word,map.get(word.length()-1)) &&
!isTransposed(word,map.get(word.length())) &&
!isSubstituted(word,map.get(word.length())) &&
!isCapital(word,map.get(word.length())))
{
noSuggestion=true;
}
where each individual method works perfectly as desired. Is there any way for java to check all conditions even when one is false? I know that the nature of the && operator is that as soon as a condition does not hold true, there is no point in checking the remaining conditions, as the entire condition is going to be set to false, but I was hoping I could do something like this in order to keep my code someone cleaner. I know I can use boolean variables, and assign the returned value to 5 different variables, but is there any other work around to force every condition to be checked? Thanks a lot in advanced
A single & is a non-short-circuit operand - ie both sides are evaluated irrespective of whether required.
More info here - https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se8/html/jls-15.html#jls-15.22.2
However, this sounds like a poor design. In fact, some code analysis tools would automatically flag these operators as suspicious for this reason. Typically you would want to call each method as they make some change to the state of your objects, which is not something you would expect in an if statement. But your method names do not suggest this. What are you trying to achieve?
This question has already been asked, but the answers seem to be incomplete. What does the first colon in the following context mean?
import hudson.model.SCMS;
(...)
SCMS: for (SCM scm : scmTriggerItem.getSCMs()) {
(...)
Additionally, the colon has some new uses in Java 8.
This question (which has originally been asked two years ago) is different from loop-in-java-code, because it is wider. While the answers of the original question do not mention the use of the colon as label, which is answered in question "loop-in-java-code", the latter question doesn't ask for the use of the colon within for loops nor in Java 8.
As the answer from biziclop shows, there are colon usages in the Java syntax that are easily forgotten and not mentioned in the other two questions.
There are four six uses of the : character in the Java language.
To denote a label. Labels can be used to break or continue to in loops.
In an enhanced for statement (also called for-each statement), which allows easy iteration across collections and arrays.
As one half of the ?: conditional operator.
And since Java 8, as part of the :: method reference operator.
In a switch statement, after case or default.
And you can also use it in an assert statement to specify an error message when the assertion fails.
In your case, SCMS: is a label, while for (SCM scm : scmTriggerItem.getSCMs()) is an enhanced for statement.
You can always look up the full syntax reference of Java here. It is amazingly dull but without it I easily missed two of the six cases.
This question already has answers here:
Is it ok if I omit curly braces in Java? [closed]
(16 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
I am using if condition without braces in java something like
if(somecondition)
//Only one line Business logic
but some told use braces always even one line statement something like this
if(somecondition){
//Only one line Business logic
}
What is the better way according to java sandard?
there's no real "standard". i prefer always using braces because if you dont you risk someone adding an innocent looking logging statement turning your code from
if(somecondition)
//Only one line Business logic
into
if(somecondition)
log.debug("condition was true");
//Only one line Business logic
and then things stop working :-)
That's a matter of taste. I would use braces or else no braces but write all code in one line to improve readability.
Also you might consider using a ternary operator
booleanExpression ? value1 : value2
In addition to #radai answer, if you are a real evil mind, when you see a if with no braces you can do something that will make you ennemies by adding a semi-colon on the same line of the if but at the 800th column of the line(or something).
like
if(condition) /*a loooot of whitespace*/ ;
//Only one line Business logic that will get executed whatever is the condition
This is why i prefer to use braces and recommend people to use them
No naked if statements. You're just asking for trouble. Always use { }
it is better to use braces when checking for errors or updating the code.
imagine.
if(answer.equals("add"))
addedValue += Scanner.readInt();
but you have a new requirement to add only the absolute value, so you change to.
if(answer.equals("add2))
valueToBeAdded = Scanner.readInt();
if(valueToBeAdded < 0) valueToBeAdded = - valueToBeAdded;
addedValue += valueToBeAdded;
this is not a really correct algorithm, is just an example of what can happens.
Using if statement with braces is better way to java standard, because it increase the readability and reduce unwanted error.
The two statements have exactly the same effect but I have suffered so often from the lack of braces that I also always comment that there should be braces even around 1 line statements. This makes the code easier to maintain and can save a lot of headache. My experience shows that one line if statements often turn into multi-line statements on later iterations so what you save by not writing two { the first time, you will give later on.
According to java standard braces are better because if they are not there compiler has to work around more and also would be performance issue.
This question already has answers here:
Semicolon at end of 'if' statement
(18 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
By "empty if-statement", I mean something like this (note the semicolon):
if (condition);
I'm having trouble thinking of an application for this. With a while loop you can do this:
while (callUntilReturnsFalse());
But there's no such application for an if-statement. What's more, the Java compiler doesn't issue an error or a warning when confronted with such a statement. This can lead to large and silent problems, especially with a long and convoluted statement:
if ((functionA() && functionB(getFoo()) ||
checkForComplexCondition(arg1, arg2, getBar(getFoo())));
{
doStuff();
}
My question is: why is this allowed in Java? And, more importantly, can I enable an option to cause a warning when this happens?
(This question was asked before with regards to C#, which does issue a warning, but I was hoping to find a way to cause a warning with Java.)
why is this allowed in Java?
See Java Language Specification (14.6. The Empty Statement):
An empty statement does nothing.
It's simply allowed and it's equivalent to (and will be translated to):
if (condition) { }
Which means, if the condition is true, do nothing.
If you're using eclipse, you can look here, you might find something useful (I'm not sure there exists such an option for semicolon terminator):
Window → Preferences → Java → Compiler → Error/Warnings
EDIT
As #nullptr pointed out in his answer, there exist an IDE warning for this, you need to set warning on Empty statement.
I don't think this is truly relevant to the intent of the question but I think it should be stated as it is relevant to the essence of the question.
There is an effect of an:
if(variable);
if the variable is volatile. It''s effect is to cause a memory barrier to be honoured between the current thread and any other threads accessing the variable.
public volatile variable;
....
if(variable);
See here for a more detailed discussion.
I cannot imagine any real value to putting this kind of statement in your code but I felt it important to note that there is a real effect to this statement in this very specific situation.
There's one construct that I use fairly frequently which the "null statement" makes clearer and easier to understand. Here's an example:
for (int i=0; i < argc; i++)
{
if (argv[i]=="left")
hpos++;
else if (argv[i]=="right")
hpos--;
else if (argv[i]=="up")
;
else if (arv[i]=="down")
;
else fprintf(stderr, "Unknown option \"%s\\n".", argv[i]);
}
In this case, I still want to check for the existence of certain options, while only executing code for some of them. In this case, using the null statement, as above, makes the function and structure of the code more readable and comprehensible to the next guy who has to come along and maintain it.
There are certainly ways to restructure this code to not require the null statement. But I don't believe that its intention will be as clear as in the code snippet.
I found a warning for this in Eclipse as Empty statement:
Thanks to Maroun Maroun for putting me on the right track.
I don't see so much danger in the possibility of an if with an empty statement. The rationale behind it resides in the grammar of the Java language, which allows the empty statement ;:
Block:
{ BlockStatements }
BlockStatements:
{ BlockStatement }
BlockStatement:
LocalVariableDeclarationStatement
ClassOrInterfaceDeclaration
[Identifier :] Statement
LocalVariableDeclarationStatement:
{ VariableModifier } Type VariableDeclarators ;
Statement:
Block
;
Identifier : Statement
StatementExpression ;
if ParExpression Statement [else Statement]
assert Expression [: Expression] ;
switch ParExpression { SwitchBlockStatementGroups }
while ParExpression Statement
do Statement while ParExpression ;
for ( ForControl ) Statement
break [Identifier] ;
continue [Identifier] ;
return [Expression] ;
throw Expression ;
synchronized ParExpression Block
try Block (Catches | [Catches] Finally)
try ResourceSpecification Block [Catches] [Finally]
Mind that this is true for almost all imperative languages.
I mean it can be dangerous and difficult to find as every other empty body in case you forgot any implementation, certainly nothing I would lose the sleep for. In a long and convoluted statement you could get problems because of a ( ) closing the wrong pair of expressions or even for thinking your condition wrong (especially with many && and ||).
I'm mostly a C# developer, although I have a little Java background. But I think my answer applies to both. I suspect it's not an intentional feature, but more of an emergent feature. The grammar of the language goes (roughly)
if (*condition*)
*statement*
Unfortunately the below are both valid statements (I checked, you can drop as many into C# as you like and the compiler doesn't complain):
;
{
}
Therefore the construct that you highlighted is allowed.
The condition could be a function call with side effects. It wouldn't be correct to treat it as an error or warning.
In the statement
if (eval) { //pseudo-code
}
Sometimes data is actually changed in evaluation of (eval). For example, in
while (someIterator.next()) {
}
Calling next() actually changes the state of the someIterator object.
And of course there is the classic example that usually happens from a typo (and is not recommended)
int x;
if (x = getNumberOfWidgets() > 5) {
}
Conventional wisdom advises against coding this way, as it is harder to tell what is going on. However, the statements are legal and so that is one reason why such an 'if' statement is allowed.
I believe that they left it in because it can increase code readability. Even if nothing should be done for a case you may still want to let people know that the case is important.