I can't see the reason why the Boolean wrapper classes were made Immutable.
Why the Boolean Wrapper was not implemented like MutableBoolean in Commons lang which actually can be reset.
Does anyone have any idea/understanding about this ? Thanks.
It is because all primitive wrapper classes (Integer, Byte, Long, Float, Double, Character, Boolean, and Short) are immutable in Java, so operations like addition and subtraction create a new object and not modify the old.
Boolean is immutable like Strings, you can change the value of it and allocate new mem allocation, but the first reference remains on the memory allocation who has the false value.
Yes, wrapper classes are mutable.
Boolean doesn't work because there are no set* methods in the Boolean class (I would say that Boolean is immutable, you can only change the reference, but you can't change the object itself).
Because 2
is 2. It won't be 3
tomorrow.
Immutable is always preferred as the default, especially in multithreaded situations, and it makes for easier to read and more maintainable code. Case in point: the Java Date
API, which is riddled with design flaws. If Date
were immutable the API would be very streamlined. I would know Date
operations would create new dates and would never have to look for APIs that modify them.
Read Concurrency in Practice to understand the true importance of immutable types.
But also note that if for some reason you want mutable types, use AtomicInteger
AtomicBoolean
, etc. Why Atomic
? Because by introducing mutability you introduced a need for threadsafety. Which you wouldn't have needed if your types stayed immutable, so in using mutable types you also must pay the price of thinking about threadsafety and using types from the concurrent
package. Welcome to the wonderful world of concurrent programming.
Also, for Boolean
- I challenge you to name a single operation that you might want to perform that cares whether Boolean is mutable. set to true? Use myBool = true
. That is a re-assignment, not a mutation. Negate? myBool = !myBool
. Same rule. Note that immutability is a feature, not a constraint, so if you can offer it, you should - and in these cases, of course you can.
Note this applies to other types as well. The most subtle thing with integers is count++
, but that is just count = count + 1
, unless you care about getting the value atomically... in which case use the mutable AtomicInteger
.
Wrapper classes in Java are immutable so the runtime can have only two Boolean objects - one for true, one for false - and every variable is a reference to one of those two. And since they can never be changed, you know they'll never be pulled out from under you. Not only does this save memory, it makes your code easier to reason about - since the wrapper classes you're passing around you know will never have their value change, they won't suddenly jump to a new value because they're accidentally a reference to the same value elsewhere.
Similarly, Integer has a cache of all signed byte values - -128 to 127 - so the runtime doesn't have to have extra instances of those common Integer values.
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