你可以使用java.util.Scanner对象。

public static boolean isNumeric(String inputData) {
      Scanner sc = new Scanner(inputData);
      return sc.hasNextInt();
    }

异常开销很大，但在这种情况下，RegEx需要更长的时间。下面的代码显示了两个函数的简单测试——一个使用异常，一个使用正则表达式。在我的机器上，RegEx版本比异常慢10倍。

import java.util.Date;


public class IsNumeric {

public static boolean isNumericOne(String s) {
    return s.matches("-?\\d+(\\.\\d+)?");  //match a number with optional '-' and decimal.      
}

public static boolean isNumericTwo(String s) {
    try {
        Double.parseDouble(s);
        return true;
    } catch (Exception e) {
        return false;
    }
}

public static void main(String [] args) {

    String test = "12345.F";

    long before = new Date().getTime();     
    for(int x=0;x<1000000;++x) {
        //isNumericTwo(test);
        isNumericOne(test);
    }
    long after = new Date().getTime();

    System.out.println(after-before);

}

}

如果你们用下面的方法来检查:

public static boolean isNumeric(String str) {
    NumberFormat formatter = NumberFormat.getInstance();
    ParsePosition pos = new ParsePosition(0);
    formatter.parse(str, pos);
    return str.length() == pos.getIndex();
}

然后输入非常长的字符串会发生什么，比如我调用这个方法:

System.out.println(isNumeric("94328948243242352525243242524243425452342343948923"));

结果是“真”，也是一个太大的数字! 如果你使用regex来检查，同样的事情也会发生! 所以我宁愿使用“解析”方法来检查，就像这样:

public static boolean isNumeric(String str) {
    try {
        int number = Integer.parseInt(str);
        return true;
    } catch (Exception e) {
        return false;
    }
}

结果就如我所料!

我修改了CraigTP的解决方案，使其接受科学计数法，同时接受点和逗号作为小数分隔符

^-?\d+([,\.]\d+)?([eE]-?\d+)?$

例子

var re = new RegExp("^-?\d+([,\.]\d+)?([eE]-?\d+)?$");
re.test("-6546"); // true
re.test("-6546355e-4456"); // true
re.test("-6546.355e-4456"); // true, though debatable
re.test("-6546.35.5e-4456"); // false
re.test("-6546.35.5e-4456.6"); // false

这是我对这个问题的回答。

一个方便的方法，你可以使用任何类型的解析器来解析任何字符串:isParsable(对象解析器，字符串str)。解析器可以是Class或对象。这也将允许你使用你写的自定义解析器，应该适用于任何场景，例如:

isParsable(Integer.class, "11");
isParsable(Double.class, "11.11");
Object dateFormater = new java.text.SimpleDateFormat("yyyy.MM.dd G 'at' HH:mm:ss z");
isParsable(dateFormater, "2001.07.04 AD at 12:08:56 PDT");

下面是我的代码和方法描述。

import java.lang.reflect.*;

/**
 * METHOD: isParsable<p><p>
 * 
 * This method will look through the methods of the specified <code>from</code> parameter
 * looking for a public method name starting with "parse" which has only one String
 * parameter.<p>
 * 
 * The <code>parser</code> parameter can be a class or an instantiated object, eg:
 * <code>Integer.class</code> or <code>new Integer(1)</code>. If you use a
 * <code>Class</code> type then only static methods are considered.<p>
 * 
 * When looping through potential methods, it first looks at the <code>Class</code> associated
 * with the <code>parser</code> parameter, then looks through the methods of the parent's class
 * followed by subsequent ancestors, using the first method that matches the criteria specified
 * above.<p>
 * 
 * This method will hide any normal parse exceptions, but throws any exceptions due to
 * programmatic errors, eg: NullPointerExceptions, etc. If you specify a <code>parser</code>
 * parameter which has no matching parse methods, a NoSuchMethodException will be thrown
 * embedded within a RuntimeException.<p><p>
 * 
 * Example:<br>
 * <code>isParsable(Boolean.class, "true");<br>
 * isParsable(Integer.class, "11");<br>
 * isParsable(Double.class, "11.11");<br>
 * Object dateFormater = new java.text.SimpleDateFormat("yyyy.MM.dd G 'at' HH:mm:ss z");<br>
 * isParsable(dateFormater, "2001.07.04 AD at 12:08:56 PDT");<br></code>
 * <p>
 * 
 * @param parser    The Class type or instantiated Object to find a parse method in.
 * @param str   The String you want to parse
 * 
 * @return true if a parse method was found and completed without exception
 * @throws java.lang.NoSuchMethodException If no such method is accessible 
 */
public static boolean isParsable(Object parser, String str) {
    Class theClass = (parser instanceof Class? (Class)parser: parser.getClass());
    boolean staticOnly = (parser == theClass), foundAtLeastOne = false;
    Method[] methods = theClass.getMethods();

    // Loop over methods
    for (int index = 0; index < methods.length; index++) {
        Method method = methods[index];

        // If method starts with parse, is public and has one String parameter.
        // If the parser parameter was a Class, then also ensure the method is static. 
        if(method.getName().startsWith("parse") &&
            (!staticOnly || Modifier.isStatic(method.getModifiers())) &&
            Modifier.isPublic(method.getModifiers()) &&
            method.getGenericParameterTypes().length == 1 &&
            method.getGenericParameterTypes()[0] == String.class)
        {
            try {
                foundAtLeastOne = true;
                method.invoke(parser, str);
                return true; // Successfully parsed without exception
            } catch (Exception exception) {
                // If invoke problem, try a different method
                /*if(!(exception instanceof IllegalArgumentException) &&
                   !(exception instanceof IllegalAccessException) &&
                   !(exception instanceof InvocationTargetException))
                        continue; // Look for other parse methods*/

                // Parse method refuses to parse, look for another different method
                continue; // Look for other parse methods
            }
        }
    }

    // No more accessible parse method could be found.
    if(foundAtLeastOne) return false;
    else throw new RuntimeException(new NoSuchMethodException());
}


/**
 * METHOD: willParse<p><p>
 * 
 * A convienence method which calls the isParseable method, but does not throw any exceptions
 * which could be thrown through programatic errors.<p>
 * 
 * Use of {@link #isParseable(Object, String) isParseable} is recommended for use so programatic
 * errors can be caught in development, unless the value of the <code>parser</code> parameter is
 * unpredictable, or normal programtic exceptions should be ignored.<p>
 * 
 * See {@link #isParseable(Object, String) isParseable} for full description of method
 * usability.<p>
 * 
 * @param parser    The Class type or instantiated Object to find a parse method in.
 * @param str   The String you want to parse
 * 
 * @return true if a parse method was found and completed without exception
 * @see #isParseable(Object, String) for full description of method usability 
 */
public static boolean willParse(Object parser, String str) {
    try {
        return isParsable(parser, str);
    } catch(Throwable exception) {
        return false;
    }
}

为什么每个人都在推动异常/正则表达式解决方案?

虽然我能理解大多数人都喜欢使用try/catch，但如果你想频繁地使用它……这可能会非常累人。

我在这里所做的是使用regex、parsennumber()方法和数组搜索方法来查看哪个是最有效的。这一次，我只研究了整数。

public static boolean isNumericRegex(String str) {
    if (str == null)
        return false;
    return str.matches("-?\\d+");
}

public static boolean isNumericArray(String str) {
    if (str == null)
        return false;
    char[] data = str.toCharArray();
    if (data.length <= 0)
        return false;
    int index = 0;
    if (data[0] == '-' && data.length > 1)
        index = 1;
    for (; index < data.length; index++) {
        if (data[index] < '0' || data[index] > '9') // Character.isDigit() can go here too.
            return false;
    }
    return true;
}

public static boolean isNumericException(String str) {
    if (str == null)
        return false;
    try {  
        /* int i = */ Integer.parseInt(str);
    } catch (NumberFormatException nfe) {  
        return false;  
    }
    return true;
}

我得到的速度结果是:

Done with: for (int i = 0; i < 10000000; i++)...

With only valid numbers ("59815833" and "-59815833"):
    Array numeric took 395.808192 ms [39.5808192 ns each]
    Regex took 2609.262595 ms [260.9262595 ns each]
    Exception numeric took 428.050207 ms [42.8050207 ns each]
    // Negative sign
    Array numeric took 355.788273 ms [35.5788273 ns each]
    Regex took 2746.278466 ms [274.6278466 ns each]
    Exception numeric took 518.989902 ms [51.8989902 ns each]
    // Single value ("1")
    Array numeric took 317.861267 ms [31.7861267 ns each]
    Regex took 2505.313201 ms [250.5313201 ns each]
    Exception numeric took 239.956955 ms [23.9956955 ns each]
    // With Character.isDigit()
    Array numeric took 400.734616 ms [40.0734616 ns each]
    Regex took 2663.052417 ms [266.3052417 ns each]
    Exception numeric took 401.235906 ms [40.1235906 ns each]

With invalid characters ("5981a5833" and "a"):
    Array numeric took 343.205793 ms [34.3205793 ns each]
    Regex took 2608.739933 ms [260.8739933 ns each]
    Exception numeric took 7317.201775 ms [731.7201775 ns each]
    // With a single character ("a")
    Array numeric took 291.695519 ms [29.1695519 ns each]
    Regex took 2287.25378 ms [228.725378 ns each]
    Exception numeric took 7095.969481 ms [709.5969481 ns each]

With null:
    Array numeric took 214.663834 ms [21.4663834 ns each]
    Regex took 201.395992 ms [20.1395992 ns each]
    Exception numeric took 233.049327 ms [23.3049327 ns each]
    Exception numeric took 6603.669427 ms [660.3669427 ns each] if there is no if/null check

免责声明:我并没有声称这些方法是100%优化的，它们只是为了演示数据

当且仅当数字为4个字符或更少，并且每个字符串总是一个数字时，例外获胜……既然如此，为什么还要支票呢?

简而言之，如果使用try/catch频繁地遇到无效数字，那将非常痛苦，这是有意义的。我一直遵循的一个重要规则是永远不要在程序流中使用try/catch。这是一个例子。

有趣的是，简单的if char <0 || >9写起来非常简单，容易记忆(应该可以在多种语言中工作)，并且赢得了几乎所有的测试场景。

唯一的缺点是，我猜Integer.parseInt()可能处理非ASCII数字，而数组搜索方法不。

对于那些想知道为什么我说很容易记住字符数组1的人来说，如果你知道没有负号，你可以很容易地得到一些像这样的浓缩:

public static boolean isNumericArray(String str) {
    if (str == null)
        return false;
    for (char c : str.toCharArray())
        if (c < '0' || c > '9')
            return false;
    return true;

最后，作为最后的说明，我很好奇在所有投票都被接受的例子中的赋值操作符。加上赋值

double d = Double.parseDouble(...)

不仅没有用，因为您甚至没有使用该值，而且它浪费了处理时间，并使运行时增加了几纳秒(这导致测试中增加了100-200毫秒)。我不明白为什么有人会这么做，因为这实际上是降低性能的额外工作。

你可能会认为这会被优化掉……虽然也许我应该检查字节码，看看编译器在做什么。这并不能解释为什么它对我来说总是更长，尽管它以某种方式被优化了……所以我想知道发生了什么。注意:这里所说的更长，我的意思是运行测试10000000次迭代，并且运行该程序多次(10x+)总是显示它更慢。

编辑:更新了Character.isDigit()的测试