Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 654099
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T22:27:23+00:00 2026-05-13T22:27:23+00:00

Are these two constructs equivalent? char[] arr = new char[5]; for (char x :

  • 0

Are these two constructs equivalent?

char[] arr = new char[5];
for (char x : arr) {
    // code goes here
}

Compared to:

char[] arr = new char[5];
for (int i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
    char x = arr[i];
    // code goes here
}

That is, if I put exactly the same code in the body of both loops (and they compile), will they behave exactly the same???


Full disclaimer: this was inspired by another question (Java: are these 2 codes the same). My answer there turned out not to be the answer, but I feel that the exact semantics of Java for-each has some nuances that needs pointing out.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-13T22:27:24+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 10:27 pm

    While often the two constructs are interchangeable, THEY ARE NOT 100% EQUIVALENT!!!

    A proof can be constructed by defining // code goes here that would cause the two constructs to behave differently. One such loop body is:

    arr = null;
    

    Therefore, we are now comparing:

    char[] arr = new char[5];
    for (char x : arr) {
        arr = null;
    }
    

    with:

    char[] arr = new char[5];
    for (int i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
        char x = arr[i];
        arr = null;
    }
    

    Both code compiles, but if you run them, you will find that the first loop terminates normally, while the second loop will throw a NullPointerException.

    This means that they are not 100% equivalent! There are scenarios where the two constructs will behave differently!

    Such scenarios are likely to be rare, but this fact should not be forgotten when debugging, because otherwise you might miss some really subtle bugs.


    As an addendum, note that sometimes the for-each construct is not even an option, e.g. if you need the index. The crucial lesson here is that even if it’s an option, you need to make sure that it’s actually an equivalent substitute, because it’s not always guaranteed

    Similarly, if you start with a for-each loop and later realized that you need to switch to the indexed for loop, make sure that you’re preserving the semantics, because it’s not guaranteed.

    In particular, _be wary of any modification to the reference of the array/collection being iterated_ (modification to the content may/may not trigger ConcurrentModificationException, but that’s a different issue).

    Guaranteeing semantics preservation is also a lot more difficult when you use collections that use custom iterators, but as this example shows, the two constructs are different even when simple arrays are involved.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Ask A Question

Stats

  • Questions 481k
  • Answers 481k
  • Best Answers 0
  • User 1
  • Popular
  • Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to approach applying for a job at a company ...

    • 7 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to handle personal stress caused by utterly incompetent and ...

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    What is a programmer’s life like?

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer I figured this out. The sample above actually does work,… May 16, 2026 at 6:32 am
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer have you tried a call to availableMediaTypesForSourceType: for testing the… May 16, 2026 at 6:32 am
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer $('#id').click(function() { // load autocomplete }); May 16, 2026 at 6:32 am

Trending Tags

analytics british company computer developers django employee employer english facebook french google interview javascript language life php programmer programs salary

Top Members

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.