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 9078535
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 16, 20262026-06-16T19:38:50+00:00 2026-06-16T19:38:50+00:00

I was surprised to see that equals() is apparently overridden for ArrayList<String> . Because

  • 0

I was surprised to see that equals() is apparently overridden for ArrayList<String>. Because contains() in Collection<> apparently compares values, not references. Of course, for Collection<Object>, references would be compared. In the program below, shouldn’t I get false on the second line?

public static void main(String[] args) {
    ArrayList<String> al = new ArrayList<String>();
    al.add("Obama");
    al.add("Reagan");
    al.add("Bush");
    al.add("Nyquist");
    StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer();
    sb.append("Bush");

    System.out.println("compares values? using constants " + al.contains("Bush"));
    System.out.println("compares values? using local variable " + al.contains(sb.toString()));
}

run:
compares values? using constants true
compares values? using local variable true
  • 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
    2026-06-16T19:38:52+00:00Added an answer on June 16, 2026 at 7:38 pm

    This is exactly the output you should expect, and Collection<Object> would be no different. All Collection types, unless specified otherwise, use .equals(Object), and differing implementations violate the Collection contract. (And to be clear, upcasting a String to an Object does not change the behavior of its equals method.)

    There is some precedent — see e.g. the TreeSet implementations, which use comparison-based equality, and IdentityHashSet, which uses reference equality — but these should usually be used only when the two notions of equality match, or for significant and unusual need.

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

Sidebar

Related Questions

I'm surprised to see that there does not appear to be a method to
I was surprised to see that the following doesn't work as expected. define('CONST_TEST','Some string');
I am pretty new to silverlight and was very surprised to see that only
Folks I am surprised to see my code working, that I dont have any
I'm a little surprised that it is not possible to set up a binding
I was surprised to see in the Java source that System.arraycopy is a native
I was surprised to see an example of a string being initialised to null
When writing this TypeScript code I was surprised to see that TypeScript compiler does
Possible Duplicate: Javascript array sort and unique I was surprised to see that there
I have implemented my own RingBuffer , but I'm surprised to see that .NET

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.