JavaScript is not currently enabled, but is required for full CodeSonar manual search and browse functionality.

If you are viewing this file in your hub's Web GUI, enable JavaScript in your browser: you will also need it for GUI functionality.

If you opened this file directly from disk, your browser may be directly suppressing JavaScript functionality: certain browsers perform this suppression on local files (but not files delivered by web servers) for security reasons.

CodeSonar® 9.2p0 CONFIDENTIAL CodeSecure Inc
Java


JAVA.COMPARE.EQ : Should Use equals() Instead of == (Java)

Summary

Two objects are compared with == but equals() seems more appropriate instead.

This checker identifies incorrect or inefficient comparisons through equals() or ==. In some cases, these comparisons are wrong: for instance, strings should be compared for equality through equals() rather than through ==. Classes can be safely compared through == instead. In other cases, these comparisons can be replaced by more efficient code.

Properties

Class Name Should Use equals() Instead of == (Java)
Significance reliability
Mnemonic JAVA.COMPARE.EQ
Categories
CWE CWE:595 Comparison of Object References Instead of Object Contents
CERT-Java CERT-Java:EXP02-J Do not use the Object.equals() method to compare two arrays
  CERT-Java:EXP03-J Do not use the equality operators when comparing values of boxed primitives
Availability Available for Java and Kotlin.
Enabling Checks for this warning class are enabled by default. To disable them, add the following WARNING_FILTER rule to the project configuration file.
WARNING_FILTER += discard class="Should Use equals() Instead of == (Java)"

Example

// Main.java
public class Main {
  public static boolean verbose;
  private final static String[] arr = new String[] { "verbose" };

  public static void main(String[] args) {
    if (args.length > 0)
      assert !args[0].equals("");                // Comparison to Empty String (Java)    
                                                 // warning issued here. 

    if (args.length > 0 && args[0] == "verbose") // Should Use equals() Instead of == (Java)     
                                                 // warning issued here. 
      verbose = true;

    if (args.equals(arr))                        // equals on Array (Java)    
                                                 // warning issued here. 
      verbose = true;

    if (args.length > 0) {
      Main m = new Main();
      System.out.println(m.test(args[0]));
      System.out.println(m.weAreRedefined());
    }
  }

  private boolean test(Object o) {
    return o == this;                            /* == Always Fails (Java)     
                                                  * warning issued here (objects are of incompatible type:  
                                                  * a String and an instance of Main. 
                                                  */ 
  }

  public boolean weAreRedefined() {
    return !getClass().equals(Main.class);       // Should Use == Instead of equals() (Java)
                                                 // warning issued here. 
  }
}

Each of these warnings corresponds to incorrect or inefficient comparisons. The programmer should rewrite the code as follows.

// Main.java, after modification
public class Main {
  public static boolean verbose;
  private final static String[] arr = new String[] { "verbose" };

  public static void main(String[] args) {
    if (args.length > 0)
      assert !args[0].isEmpty();

    if (args.length > 0 && args[0].equals("verbose"))
      verbose = true;

    if (java.util.Arrays.equals(args, arr))
      verbose = true;

    if (args.length > 0) {
      Main m = new Main();
      //System.out.println(m.test(args[0]));
      System.out.println(m.weAreRedefined());
    }
  }

  public boolean weAreRedefined() {
    return getClass() != Main.class;
  }
}

Resolution

Check if the equality is actually wrong or can be replaced by more optimized code.

Relevant Configuration File Parameters

The following configuration file parameters affect checks for this warning class.

 

To report problems with this documentation, please visit https://support.codesecure.com/.