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

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • 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 8281481
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 8, 20262026-06-08T10:02:51+00:00 2026-06-08T10:02:51+00:00

I thought that null is allowed for a Set . So why does the

  • 0

I thought that null is allowed for a Set.
So why does the following code:

SortedSet<Integer> set = new TreeSet<Integer>();  
set.add(null);  
set.add(1);  //--->Line indicated by exception  

Gives the following exception?

Exception in thread “main” java.lang.NullPointerException at
java.lang.Integer.compareTo(Unknown Source) at
java.lang.Integer.compareTo(Unknown Source) at
java.util.TreeMap.put(Unknown Source) at
java.util.TreeSet.add(Unknown Source)

  • 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
    2026-06-08T10:02:52+00:00Added an answer on June 8, 2026 at 10:02 am

    Yes, you can. But you will have to provide your own Comparator to handle the case when null is compared to any other contents of your set. With natural ordering applied, Java objects do not know how to compare themselves to null. Inversely, null doesn’t know how to compare itself with any object as you cannot call null.compareTo(object).

    An example implementation of such a “null-safe” Comparator can be found in the apache commons-collections library. Check out the NullComparator. You could use it as such:

    // Unfortunately no support for Java generics yet, in commons-collections
    @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
    SortedSet<Integer> set = new TreeSet<Integer>(new NullComparator());  
    set.add(null);  
    set.add(1);
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I thought that I improve performance when I replace this code: def f(a, b):
I've always thought that it's impossible for this to be null inside instance method
I thought that by convention, only methods with an exclamation mark altered the object.
I thought that a 32-bit process could use at most 2GB RAM, since half
I thought that a delegate instance was interchangeable with a function instance. Take the
I thought that by default my Regex would exhibit the greedy behavior that I
I thought that calling BeginInvoke more than once on the same delegate instance would
I thought that this was easier… I have a asp:hyperlink control, with target=_blank ,
I thought that layout is just a widget that keeps more widgets inside. But
I thought that in principle Haskell's type system would forbid calls to impure functions

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.