Why does it (apparently) make a difference whether I pass null as an argument directly, or pass an Object that I assigned the value null?
Object testVal = null; test.foo(testVal); // dispatched to foo(Object) // test.foo(null); // compilation problem -> 'The method foo(String) is ambiguous' public void foo(String arg) { // More-specific System.out.println('foo(String)'); } public void foo(Object arg) { // Generic System.out.println('foo(Object)'); }
In other words, why is the (commented-out) second call to foo(...) not dispatched to foo(Object)?
Update: I use Java 1.6. I could compile Hemal’s code without problems, but mine still doesn’t compile. The only difference I see is that Hemal’s methods are static while mine are not. But I really don’t see why this should make a difference…?
Update 2: Solved. I had another method foo(Runnable) in my class, so the dispatcher couldn’t unambiguously select the single most specific method. (See my comment in Hemal’s second answer.) Thanks everyone for your help.
Which version of Java are you using? With 1.6.0_11 the code (pasted below) compiles and runs.
I am sure its obvious why
foo(testVal)goes tofoo(Object).The reason why
foo(null)goes tofoo(String)is a little complex. The constantnullis of typenulltype, which is a subtype of all types. So, thisnulltypeextendsString, which extendsObject.When you call
foo(null)compiler looks for the overloaded method with most specific type. SinceStringis more specific thenObjectthat is the method that gets called.If you had another overload that was as specific as String, say
foo(Integer)then you would get a ambiguous overload error.