它在使用值对象时很有用。以下摘自Portland Pattern Repository:

Examples of value objects are things like numbers, dates, monies and strings. Usually, they are small objects which are used quite widely. Their identity is based on their state rather than on their object identity. This way, you can have multiple copies of the same conceptual value object. So I can have multiple copies of an object that represents the date 16 Jan 1998. Any of these copies will be equal to each other. For a small object such as this, it is often easier to create new ones and move them around rather than rely on a single object to represent the date. A value object should always override .equals() in Java (or = in Smalltalk). (Remember to override .hashCode() as well.)

String类和包装器类的equals()和hashCode()方法实现与Object类不同。Object类的equals()方法比较对象的引用，而不是内容。Object类的hashCode()方法为每个对象返回不同的hashCode，无论内容是否相同。

It leads problem when you use Map collection and the key is of Persistent type, StringBuffer/builder type. Since they don't override equals() and hashCode() unlike String class, equals() will return false when you compare two different objects even though both have same contents. It will make the hashMap storing same content keys. Storing same content keys means it is violating the rule of Map because Map doesnt allow duplicate keys at all. Therefore you override equals() as well as hashCode() methods in your class and provide the implementation(IDE can generate these methods) so that they work same as String's equals() and hashCode() and prevent same content keys.

你必须重写hashCode()方法和equals()，因为equals()根据hashCode工作。

此外，与equals()一起重写hashCode()方法有助于完好无损equals()-hashCode()契约:“如果两个对象相等，那么它们必须具有相同的哈希码。”

什么时候需要为hashCode()编写自定义实现?

正如我们所知，HashMap的内部工作是基于哈希原理的。条目集存储在特定的存储桶中。您可以根据自己的需求定制hashCode()实现，以便相同的类别对象可以存储在相同的索引中。 当你使用put(k,v)方法将值存储到Map集合中时，put()的内部实现是:

put(k, v){
hash(k);
index=hash & (n-1);
}

意思是，它生成索引，索引是基于特定键对象的hashcode生成的。所以让这个方法根据你的需求生成哈希码，因为相同的哈希码条目集将存储在相同的桶或索引中。

就是这样!

在这个回答中没有提到测试equals/hashcode契约。

我发现EqualsVerifier库非常有用和全面。它也很容易使用。

另外，从头构建equals()和hashCode()方法涉及大量样板代码。Apache Commons Lang库提供了EqualsBuilder和HashCodeBuilder类。这些类极大地简化了复杂类的equals()和hashCode()方法的实现。

顺便说一句，值得考虑重写toString()方法以帮助调试。Apache Commons Lang库提供了ToStringBuilder类来帮助实现这一点。

因为如果你不重写它们，你将使用Object中的默认实现。

考虑到实例相等和hascode值通常需要了解组成对象的内容，它们通常需要在类中重新定义，以具有任何有形的意义。

The methods equals and hashcode are defined in the object class. By default if the equals method returns true, then the system will go further and check the value of the hash code. If the hash code of the 2 objects is also same only then the objects will be considered as same. So if you override only equals method, then even though the overridden equals method indicates 2 objects to be equal , the system defined hashcode may not indicate that the 2 objects are equal. So we need to override hash code as well.

Bah -“你必须在每个重写equals()的类中重写hashCode()。”

[出自Joshua Bloch的《Effective Java》?］

Isn't this the wrong way round? Overriding hashCode likely implies you're writing a hash-key class, but overriding equals certainly does not. There are many classes that are not used as hash-keys, but do want a logical-equality-testing method for some other reason. If you choose "equals" for it, you may then be mandated to write a hashCode implementation by overzealous application of this rule. All that achieves is adding untested code in the codebase, an evil waiting to trip someone up in the future. Also writing code you don't need is anti-agile. It's just wrong (and an ide generated one will probably be incompatible with your hand-crafted equals).

他们肯定应该在被写来用作键的对象上强制设置一个接口吗?无论如何，Object永远不应该提供默认的hashCode()和equals() imho。它可能鼓励了许多破碎的散列集合。

但无论如何，我认为“规则”是前后颠倒的。与此同时，我将继续避免使用“等号”进行相等性测试方法:-(