在最新版本的JDK中，仍然使用31。https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/12/docs/api/java.base/java/lang/String.html hashCode ()

哈希字符串的目的是

唯一(让我们看看hashcode计算文档中的运算符^，它有助于唯一) 计算成本低

31是可以放入8位(= 1字节)寄存器的最大值，是可以放入1字节寄存器的最大素数，是奇数。

31乘以<<5然后减去自己，因此需要廉价的资源。

Bloch并没有深入研究这个问题，但我总是听到/相信这是基本的代数。哈希可以归结为乘法和模运算，这意味着如果可以的话，永远不要使用带公因式的数字。换句话说，相对素数提供了答案的均匀分布。

使用哈希的数字通常是:

你放入的数据类型的模量 (2^32或2^64) 哈希表中桶数的模数(变化。在java中，以前是质数，现在是2^n) 在混合函数中乘以或平移一个神奇的数字 输入值

实际上，您只能控制其中的几个值，因此需要多加注意。

在JDK-4045622中，Joshua Bloch描述了为什么选择特定的(新)String.hashCode()实现的原因

The table below summarizes the performance of the various hash functions described above, for three data sets: 1) All of the words and phrases with entries in Merriam-Webster's 2nd Int'l Unabridged Dictionary (311,141 strings, avg length 10 chars). 2) All of the strings in /bin/, /usr/bin/, /usr/lib/, /usr/ucb/ and /usr/openwin/bin/* (66,304 strings, avg length 21 characters). 3) A list of URLs gathered by a web-crawler that ran for several hours last night (28,372 strings, avg length 49 characters). The performance metric shown in the table is the "average chain size" over all elements in the hash table (i.e., the expected value of the number of key compares to look up an element). Webster's Code Strings URLs --------- ------------ ---- Current Java Fn. 1.2509 1.2738 13.2560 P(37) [Java] 1.2508 1.2481 1.2454 P(65599) [Aho et al] 1.2490 1.2510 1.2450 P(31) [K+R] 1.2500 1.2488 1.2425 P(33) [Torek] 1.2500 1.2500 1.2453 Vo's Fn 1.2487 1.2471 1.2462 WAIS Fn 1.2497 1.2519 1.2452 Weinberger's Fn(MatPak) 6.5169 7.2142 30.6864 Weinberger's Fn(24) 1.3222 1.2791 1.9732 Weinberger's Fn(28) 1.2530 1.2506 1.2439 Looking at this table, it's clear that all of the functions except for the current Java function and the two broken versions of Weinberger's function offer excellent, nearly indistinguishable performance. I strongly conjecture that this performance is essentially the "theoretical ideal", which is what you'd get if you used a true random number generator in place of a hash function. I'd rule out the WAIS function as its specification contains pages of random numbers, and its performance is no better than any of the far simpler functions. Any of the remaining six functions seem like excellent choices, but we have to pick one. I suppose I'd rule out Vo's variant and Weinberger's function because of their added complexity, albeit minor. Of the remaining four, I'd probably select P(31), as it's the cheapest to calculate on a RISC machine (because 31 is the difference of two powers of two). P(33) is similarly cheap to calculate, but it's performance is marginally worse, and 33 is composite, which makes me a bit nervous. Josh

Java字符串hashCode()和31

这是因为31有一个很好的属性——它的乘法运算可以被逐位移位取代，这比标准乘法运算快得多:

31 * i == (i << 5) - i

根据Joshua Bloch的《Effective Java》(这本书再怎么推荐都不为过，多亏了stackoverflow上不断的提及，我才买了这本书):

选择值31是因为它是一个奇质数。如果它是偶数并且乘法溢出，信息就会丢失，因为乘2相当于移位。使用质数的优势不太明显，但它是传统的。31的一个很好的属性是乘法可以被移位和减法代替，以获得更好的性能:31 * i == (i << 5) - i。现代虚拟机自动进行这种优化。

(摘自第3章第9项:重写equals时总是重写hashcode，第48页)

Goodrich和Tamassia从超过50,000个英语单词(由Unix的两个变体提供的单词列表的并集组成)中计算出，使用常量31、33、37、39和41在每种情况下产生的碰撞将少于7次。这可能是如此多的Java实现选择此类常量的原因。

参见Java中的数据结构和算法的9.2节哈希表(第522页)。