Welcome to the Java Programming Forums
The professional, friendly Java community. 21,500 members and growing!
The Java Programming Forums are a community of Java programmers from all around the World. Our members have a wide range of skills and they all have one thing in common: A passion to learn and code Java. We invite beginner Java programmers right through to Java professionals to post here and share your knowledge. Become a part of the community, help others, expand your knowledge of Java and enjoy talking with like minded people. Registration is quick and best of all free. We look forward to meeting you.
>> REGISTER NOW TO START POSTING
Members have full access to the forums. Advertisements are removed for registered users.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Is .equals() redefined for primitive types?
Hello forums,
The object is or cointains a primitive type either String, int, short, and boolean.
I'm implementing this: object.equals(primitive type) hoping that is should be able to determing that object "Hello" is equal to String "Hello", or object "32" short is equal to Short "32", same for boolean, and int.
Most of the type the equals compares identity and not state. So I am wondering if the equals() is overrided by the primitive types.
Cheers.
Related threads:
Re: Is .equals() redefined for primitive types?
Java primitives are not objects and have no member methods associated with them. However, they can be auto-boxed into wrapper classes such as Integer, Short, etc. These are full objects and have equals() overridden to compare state. You'll have to check the definition if a Short with value 32 is equal() to an Integer with value 32, I don't remember off the top of my head if this is true or not.
Strings are not primitives in Java, but full objects and have .equals() overridden correctly to compare state.
Andrew R (September 11th, 2013)
Reply With Quote