最近我读了这篇文章 开发人员工作文件。

该文档是关于有效和正确地定义hashCode()和equals(),但我无法弄清楚为什么我们需要覆盖这两个方法。

我如何决定有效地实现这些方法?


当前回答

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.

其他回答

为了在HashMap, Hashtable等集合中使用我们自己的类对象作为键。,我们应该通过了解集合的内部工作来重写这两个方法(hashCode()和equals())。否则,它会导致我们意想不到的错误结果。

在下面的例子中,如果您注释掉Person类中equals或hashcode的覆盖,此代码将无法查找Tom的订单。使用哈希码的默认实现可能会导致哈希表查找失败。

下面是一个简化的代码,它按Person提取人们的订单。Person被用作哈希表中的键。

public class Person {
    String name;
    int age;
    String socialSecurityNumber;

    public Person(String name, int age, String socialSecurityNumber) {
        this.name = name;
        this.age = age;
        this.socialSecurityNumber = socialSecurityNumber;
    }

    @Override
    public boolean equals(Object p) {
        //Person is same if social security number is same

        if ((p instanceof Person) && this.socialSecurityNumber.equals(((Person) p).socialSecurityNumber)) {
            return true;
        } else {
            return false;
        }

    }

    @Override
    public int hashCode() {        //I am using a hashing function in String.java instead of writing my own.
        return socialSecurityNumber.hashCode();
    }
}


public class Order {
    String[]  items;

    public void insertOrder(String[]  items)
    {
        this.items=items;
    }

}



import java.util.Hashtable;

public class Main {

    public static void main(String[] args) {

       Person p1=new Person("Tom",32,"548-56-4412");
        Person p2=new Person("Jerry",60,"456-74-4125");
        Person p3=new Person("Sherry",38,"418-55-1235");

        Order order1=new Order();
        order1.insertOrder(new String[]{"mouse","car charger"});

        Order order2=new Order();
        order2.insertOrder(new String[]{"Multi vitamin"});

        Order order3=new Order();
        order3.insertOrder(new String[]{"handbag", "iPod"});

        Hashtable<Person,Order> hashtable=new Hashtable<Person,Order>();
        hashtable.put(p1,order1);
        hashtable.put(p2,order2);
        hashtable.put(p3,order3);

       //The line below will fail if Person class does not override hashCode()
       Order tomOrder= hashtable.get(new Person("Tom", 32, "548-56-4412"));
        for(String item:tomOrder.items)
        {
            System.out.println(item);
        }
    }
}

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:-(

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。