General question: When implementing an override of the default equals
method in Java, what concerns should I have about simply utilizing an already implemented compareTo
method vs writing independent logic into the equals method? I noticed someone mention in another question that foo.equals((String)null)
returns false whereas String.compareTo((String)null)
throws a NullPointerException
. What makes these inconsistent results ideal functionality?
Sample equals
method:
@Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (obj != null && obj instanceof MyClass) {
MyClass msg = (MyClass)obj;
return this.compareTo(msg) == 0;
}
return false;
}
Edit: Quote from documentation on Comparable
The natural ordering for a class C is said to be consistent with equals if and only if e1.compareTo(e2) == 0 has the same boolean value as e1.equals(e2) for every e1 and e2 of class C. Note that null is not an instance of any class, and e.compareTo(null) should throw a NullPointerException even though e.equals(null) returns false
Edit:
After further review, I find it of note that the Comparable documentation also states the following:
The implementor must ensure sgn(x.compareTo(y)) == -sgn(y.compareTo(x)) for all x and y. (This implies that x.compareTo(y) must throw an exception iff y.compareTo(x) throws an exception.)
Ergo, since null.compareTo(x)
obviously throws a NPE, x.compareTo(null)
should throw a NPE as well. Whereas for equals, that is not necessarily the case. I am pretty big on the proper handling of NPEs, so I find this relatively significant.
compareTo
may involve a lot more work than is necessary just to get an equality answer, which may end up being a performance issue, depending on your application usage.
Other than that, following DRY principles it would be a good idea to re-use the code as you have suggested.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With