Reputation: 23770
Maybe not the best Title, please feel free to edit it.
This is the code I have..
import java.util.Map;
import java.util.HashMap;
public class App {
public static void main(String[] args) {
final Foo foo = new Foo();
final Foo bar = new Foo();
System.out.println("foo equals foo: " + foo.equals(foo));
System.out.println("foo equals bar: " + foo.equals(bar));
System.out.println("foo hashcode: " + foo.hashCode());
System.out.println("bar hashcode: " + bar.hashCode());
final Map<Foo, Integer> foos = new HashMap<Foo, Integer>();
foos.put(foo, -99);
System.out.println("foos.getfoo: " + foos.get(foo));
System.out.println("foos.getbar: " + foos.get(bar));
}
}
class Foo {
@Override
public boolean equals(Object o) {
return false;
}
@Override
public int hashCode() {
return -1;
}
}
So before reading further can you guess what the output for the following 2 statement will be?
System.out.println("foos.getfoo: " + foos.get(foo));
System.out.println("foos.getbar: " + foos.get(bar));
I would expect to see:
null
null
since even though the hashCodes do match, equals for any instance of Foo
will always return false, so using an instance of Foo
as a key in a Map should not be useful at all..
However the output is:
:~ $ javac App.java
:~ $ java App
foo equals foo: false
foo equals bar: false
foo hashcode: -1
bar hashcode: -1
foos.getfoo: -99
foos.getbar: null
What am I missing? How is -99 retrieved when I use an object that has an hashcode -1 and is NOT equal to itself, but then get null later with a same type of instance that is also NOT equal to what I have in the Map and also has hashcode -1?
Upvotes: 4
Views: 86
Reputation: 131326
Because the get()
method of HashMap is optimized to check first the object reference equality before looking equals()
:
Look at the Node<K,V> getNode(int hash, Object key)
method that is invoked by the V get(Object key)
method :
final Node<K,V> getNode(int hash, Object key) {
Node<K,V>[] tab; Node<K,V> first, e; int n; K k;
if ((tab = table) != null && (n = tab.length) > 0 &&
(first = tab[(n - 1) & hash]) != null) {
if (first.hash == hash && // always check first node
((k = first.key) == key || (key != null && key.equals(k))))
return first;
if ((e = first.next) != null) {
if (first instanceof TreeNode)
return ((TreeNode<K,V>)first).getTreeNode(hash, key);
do {
if (e.hash == hash &&
((k = e.key) == key || (key != null && key.equals(k))))
return e;
} while ((e = e.next) != null);
}
}
return null;
}
This :
(k = first.key) == key
and
(k = e.key) == key
refer to this optimization.
Besides, here, you violate the rule of the equals()
contract that says that
is has to be reflexive :
class Foo {
@Override
public boolean equals(Object o) {
return false;
}
...
}
for any non-null reference value x, x.equals(x) should return true.
From the moment where a class violates the equals()
contract, you cannot have any guarantee that the classes that manipulate instances of the flawed class will have the expected behavior.
Upvotes: 7