Please explain the following statement:
The hashCode method is used by the java.util.HashSet collection class to group the elements within that set into hash buckets for swift retrieval.
The mentions of hash buckets and retrieval implies that a HashSet has some relation to a hash map as the HashSet interface only exposes add, remove and contains methods, no T retrieve(int hashCode) method.
Is it true that Hash Set uses hash codes and hash buckets internally? Or is it using Hash Map somehow instead?
There is a similar question asked in SCJP Certification about the hashcode method:
Q: 20 Which two statements are true about the hashCode method? (Choose two.)
A. The hashCode method for a given class can be used to test for
object equality and object inequality for that class.
B. The hashCode method is used by the java.util.SortedSet
collection class to order the elements within that set.
C. The hashCode method for a given class can be used to test for
object inequality, but NOT object equality, for that class.
D. The only important characteristic of the values returned by a
hashCode method is that the distribution of values must follow a
Gaussian distribution.
E. The hashCode method is used by the java.util.HashSet collection
class to group the elements within that set into hash buckets for
swift retrieval.
Answer: C, E
Explanation:(This explanation is taken from here)
If two objects are equal according to the equals(Object) method, then
calling the hashCode() method on each of the two objects must produce
the same integer result. It is NOT required that if two objects are
unequal according to the equals(java.lang.Object) method, then calling
the hashCode() method on each of the two objects must produce distinct
integer results. However, the programmer should be aware that
producing distinct integer results for unequal objects may improve the
performance of hashtables.
The values you add to a HashSet are actually set as keys of an underlying HashMap. A HashSet uses a HashMap under the hood. So, a HashMap's behavior should be expected for a HashSet as well.
Related
This question is asked by interviewer that most of answers related to hash code is used for bucketing where it checks equals to search objects.
Is there any other general use case or scenario, where hash code is beneficial and can be used in a routine program?
As recently I have used JPA where it throws exception "Composite-id class does not override hashCode()" but again it is used by implementation class of hibernate. Sly, what other places or scenario we can use hashcode other then collections especially scenario where you have used it yourself.
class a {
public int hashCode() {
}
}
class b {
public static void main(String[] str) {
//In what ways can i use hashcode here?
}
}
Let's say your class will not be used in any collection ever( which is very unlikely though), it will be used in more than one place and by other developers. Any developer using your class will expect that if two instances of that class are equal based on equals method, they should produce same hashCode value. This fundamental assumption will be broken if hashCode is not overridden to be consistent with equals and that will prevent their code to function properly.
From Effective Java , 3rd Edition :
ITEM 11: ALWAYS OVERRIDE HASHCODE WHEN YOU OVERRIDE EQUALS
You must override hashCode in every class that overrides equals. If
you fail to do so, your class will violate the general contract for
hashCode, which will prevent it from functioning properly in
collections such as HashMap and HashSet. Here is the contract, adapted
from the Object specification :
• When the hashCode method is invoked on an object repeatedly during
an execution of an application, it must consistently return the same
value, provided no information used in equals comparisons is modified.
This value need not remain consistent from one execution of an
application to another.
• If two objects are equal according to the equals(Object) method,
then calling hashCode on the two objects must produce the same integer
result.
• If two objects are unequal according to the equals(Object) method,
it is not required that calling hashCode on each of the objects must
produce distinct results. However, the programmer should be aware that
producing distinct results for unequal objects may improve the
performance of hash tables.
The key provision that is violated when you fail to override hashCode
is the second one: equal objects must have equal hash codes. Two
distinct instances may be logically equal according to a class’s
equals method, but to Object’s hashCode method, they’re just two
objects with nothing much in common. Therefore, Object’s hashCode
method returns two seemingly random numbers instead of two equal
numbers as required by the contract.
A small semantic mistake in the interview question. Hash code is not used to check equality, it's used to detect inequality. If hash codes are different the objects are guaranteed to be inequal. If the codes are equal the objects may be equal and need to be checked with the equals-method.
That said, if the hash code is cached, it could be used to speed up the equals method.
Suppose you only override equals but not hashCode
This means that hashCode is inherited from Object
Object.hashCode always tries to return different hash codes for different objects (regardless if they are equal or not)
This means that you may end up with different hash codes for two objects that you consider to be equal.
This in turn causes these two equal objects to end up in different buckets in hash based collections such as HashSet.
This causes such collections to break.
More reference: https://programming.guide/java/overriding-hashcode-and-equals.html
I have a quick question about TreeSet collections and hashCode methods. I have a TreeSet and I'm adding objects to it, before I add an object, I check to see if it exists in the TreeSet using the contains method.
I have 2 distinct objects, each of which produce a distinct hashCode using my implementation of the hashCode method, example below:
public int hashCode()
{
int hash = 7;
hash = hash * 31 + anAttribute.hashCode();
hash = hash * 31 + anotherAttribute.hashCode();
hash = hash * 31 + yetAnotherAttribute.hashCode();
return hash;
}
The hashCodes for a particular run are: 76126352 and 76126353 (the objects only differ by one digit in one attribute).
The contains method is returning true for these objects, even though the hashCodes are different. Any ideas why? This is really confusing and help would really be appreciated.
TreeSet does not use hashCode at all. It uses either compareTo or the Comparator you passed to the constructor. This is used by methods like contains to find objects in the set.
So the answer to your question is that your compareTo method or your Comparator are defined so that the two objects in question are considered equal.
From the javadocs:
a TreeSet instance performs all
element comparisons using its
compareTo (or compare) method, so two
elements that are deemed equal by this
method are, from the standpoint of the
set, equal.
From Java Doc:
If two objects are equal according to the equals(Object) method,
then calling the hashCode method on each of the two objects must
produce the same integer result.
Means: the objects you use for hashing are not equal.
You need to read Joshua Bloch's "Effective Java" chapter 3. It explains the equals contract and how to properly override equals, hashCode, and compareTo.
You don't need to checked if it is contained, because the insert() basically does the same operation (i.e. searching the proper position) on its way to the insertion point. If the object can't be inserted (i.e., the object is already contained), insert returns false.
Why do the equals methods implemented by Eclipse compare each value, wouldn't it be simpler to just compare the hashCodes of both objects?
From what I know:
hashCode always generates the same hash for the same input
So if two objects are equal, they should have the same hash
If objects that are equal have the same hash, I can just check the hash in order to determine of objects are equal or not
edit: Related question, why does one always implement the hashCode when equals is implemented, if the hashCode isn't actually needed for equals?
hashCode always generates the same hash for the same input
Correct.
So if two objects are equal, they should have the same hash
Correct.
If objects that are equal have the same hash, I can just check the hash in order to determine of objects are equal or not
Non sequitur. Objects that are unequal can also have the same hashcode. That is the purpose of a hashcode.
Related question, why does one always implement the hashCode when equals is implemented, if the hashCode isn't actually needed for equals?
Because it is needed for hashing, in HashMap, HashSet, and friends. If you think your object will never be so used, don't override it, and good luck with that.
To complement #EJP's answer, here is a perfectly valid, although useless, implementation of .hashCode():
#Override
public int hashCode()
{
return 42; // The Answer
}
Putting this in very simple terms: while every squirrel is an animal, not every animal is a squirrel. The hashCode is usually used for quick lookup - it should be efficient and it should distribute data uniformly across a lookup table - see here. But a hash function can generate collisions, which is why it shouldn't be used as a means of verifying object equality.
It's all very much dependent on the implementation of hashCode - as you can also see in fge's answer.
As to why it usually needs to be reimplemented when you override equals: they are both used when storing and retrieving objects from collections (for example a HashMap). The hashCode determines the place in the map where the object will be inserted, while equals is used to identify the object inside a collision bucket.
This question already has answers here:
Why do I need to override the equals and hashCode methods in Java?
(31 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
I know that when we override equals() method then we need to override hashcode() as well and other way around.
But i don't understand why we MUST do that?
In Joshua Bloch Book it is clearly written that we must do that, because when we deal with hash based collections, it is crucial to satisfy the Hashcode contract and I admit that, but what if I am not dealing with hash-based collections?
Why is it still required ?
Why to Override Equals ?
A programmer who compares references to value objects using the equals
method expects to find out whether they are logically equivalent, not
whether they refer to the same object .
Now coming to HashCode
Hash function which is called to produce the hashCode should return the same hash code each and every time,
when function is applied on same or equal objects. In other words, two
equal objects must produce same hash code consistently.
Implementation of HashCode provided by Object Class is not based upon logical equivalency ,
So Now if you will not override hashCode but override equals, then according to you 2 Objects are equals as they will pass the equals() test but according to Java they are not .
Consequences :
Set start allowing duplicates !!!
Map#get(key) will not return the correct value !!
and so on many other consquences..................
Data structures, such as HashMap, depend on the contract.
A HashMap achieves magical performance properties by using the hashcode to bucketize entries. Every item that is put in the map that has the same hashcode() value gets placed in the same bucket. These "collisions" are resolved by comparing within the same bucket using equals(). In other words, the hashcode is used to determine the subset of the items in the map that might be equal and in this way quickly eliminate the vast majority of the items from further consideration.
This only works if objects that are equal are placed in the same bucket, which can only be ensured if they have the same hashcode.
NOTE: In practice, the number of collisions is much higher than may be implied above, because the number of buckets used is necessarily much smaller than the number of possible hashcode values.
As per Joshua Bloch book;
A common source of bugs is the failure to override the hashCode
method. You must override hashCode in every class that overrides
equals. Failure to do so will result in a violation of the general
contract for Object.hashCode, which will prevent your class from
functioning properly in conjunction with all hash-based collections,
including HashMap, HashSet, and Hashtable.
Failing to override hashcode while overriding equals is violation the contract of Object.hashCode. But this won't have impact if you are using your objects only on non hash based collection.
However, how do you prevent; the other developers doing so. Also if an object is eligible for element of collection, better provide support for all the collections, don't have half baked objects in your project. This will fail anytime in the future, and you will be caught for not following the contacts while implementing :)
Because that is the way it is meant to be:
Whenever a.equals(b), then a.hashCode() must be same as b.hashCode().
What issues should be considered when overriding equals and hashCode in Java?
There are use-cases where you don't need hashcode(), mostly self-written scenarious, but you can never be sure, because implementations can and might be also relying on hashcode() if they are using equals()
This question is answered many times in SO, but still I will attempt to answer this .
In order to understand this concept completely, we need to understand the purpose of hashcode and equals, how they are implemented, and what exactly is this contract(that hashcode also should be overridden when equals is overridden)
equals method is used to determine the equality of the object. For primitive types, its very easy to determine the equality. We can very easily say that int 1 is always equal to 1. But this equal method talks about the equality of objects. The object equality depends on the instance variables or any other parameter (depend purely on the implementation - how you want to compare).
This equal method needs to be overridden if we want some customized comparison, lets say we want to say that two books are same if they have same title and same author, or I can say two books are equal if they have same ISBN.
hashcode method returns a hash code value of an object. The default implementation of the Object hashcode returns a distinct integers for distinct objects. This integer is calculated based on the memory address of the object.
So we can say that the default implementation of the equals method just comapres the hashcodes to check the equality of the object. But for the book example - we need it differently.
Also Equal objects must produce the same hash code as long as they are equal, however unequal objects need not produce distinct hash codes.
In case of not using a hash based collection, you can break the contract and need not to override the hashcode method - because you ll not be using the default implementations anywhere but still I would not suggest that and would say to have it as you may need it in future when you put those things in collection
This question already has answers here:
What issues should be considered when overriding equals and hashCode in Java?
(11 answers)
Why do I need to override the equals and hashCode methods in Java?
(31 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
I read in many places saying while override equals method in Java, should override hashCode method too, otherwise it is "violating the contract".
But so far I haven't faced any problem if I override only equals method, but not hashCode method.
What is the contract? And why am I not facing any problem when I am violating the contract? In which case will I face a problem if I haven't overridden the hashCode method?
The problem you will have is with collections where unicity of elements is calculated according to both .equals() and .hashCode(), for instance keys in a HashMap.
As its name implies, it relies on hash tables, and hash buckets are a function of the object's .hashCode().
If you have two objects which are .equals(), but have different hash codes, you lose!
The part of the contract here which is important is: objects which are .equals() MUST have the same .hashCode().
This is all documented in the javadoc for Object. And Joshua Bloch says you must do it in Effective Java. Enough said.
According to the doc, the default implementation of hashCode will return some integer that differ for every object
As much as is reasonably practical, the hashCode method defined by class Object does
return distinct integers for distinct objects. (This is typically implemented by
converting the internal address of the object into an integer, but this implementation
technique is not required by the JavaTM programming language.)
However some time you want the hash code to be the same for different object that have the same meaning. For example
Student s1 = new Student("John", 18);
Student s2 = new Student("John", 18);
s1.hashCode() != s2.hashCode(); // With the default implementation of hashCode
This kind of problem will be occur if you use a hash data structure in the collection framework such as HashTable, HashSet. Especially with collection such as HashSet you will end up having duplicate element and violate the Set contract.
Yes, it should be overridden. If you think you need to override equals(), then you need to override hashCode() and vice versa. The general contract of hashCode() is:
Whenever it is invoked on the same object more than once during an execution of a Java application, the hashCode method must consistently return the same integer, provided no information used in equals comparisons on the object is modified. This integer need not remain consistent from one execution of an application to another execution of the same application.
If two objects are equal according to the equals(Object) method, then calling the hashCode method on each of the two objects must produce the same integer result.
It is not required that if two objects are unequal according to the equals(java.lang.Object) method, then calling the hashCode method on each of the two objects must produce distinct integer results. However, the programmer should be aware that producing distinct integer results for unequal objects may improve the performance of hashtables.
The contract is that if obj1.equals(obj2) then obj1.hashCode() == obj2.hashCode() , it is mainly for performance reasons, as maps are mainly using hashCode method to compare entries keys.
Have a look at Hashtables, Hashmaps, HashSets and so forth. They all store the hashed key as their keys. When invoking get(Object key) the hash of the parameter is generated and lookup in the given hashes.
When not overwriting hashCode() and the instance of the key has been changed (for example a simple string that doesn't matter at all), the hashCode() could result in 2 different hashcodes for the same object, resulting in not finding your given key in map.get().
See JavaDoc of java.lang.Object
In hashCode() it says:
If two objects are equal according to the equals(Object) method,
then calling the hashCode method on each of the two objects must
produce the same integer result.
(Emphasis by me).
If you only override equals() and not hashCode() your class violates this contract.
This is also said in the JavaDoc of the equals() method:
Note that it is generally necessary to override the hashCode method
whenever this method is overridden, so as to maintain the general
contract for the hashCode method, which states that equal objects must
have equal hash codes.
A contract is: If two objects are equal then they should have the same hashcode and if two objects are not equal then they may or may not have same hash code.
Try using your object as key in HashMap (edited after comment from joachim-sauer), and you will start facing trouble. A contract is a guideline, not something forced upon you.