I just practice some basic Java practice problems and this below shows up.
if((b2 = false) | (21 % 5)>2) return true;
So b2 is assigned with false and 1 > 2 is certainly false, but how do we evaluate "|" ? should it return true?
b2 = false assigns false to the variable b2, and the expression has the value false. | on booleans means "or" (without short-circuit), so it evaluates both operands, and the outcome is true if either operand is true.
It is not a bitwise operator. If you use | on integers, it is a bitwise operator. If you use | on booleans, it is a logical operator.
Edit:
|| is a short-circuit operator. If you write (a() || b()), and a() evaluates to true, then b() will not be evaluated, because the result of the or must be true. Single | does not short-circuit, so both operands are always evaluated.
(b2 = false)
(Edited after khelwood's correction) This is also an assignment, not just a logical operation, so be careful for side effects.
And yes, for a boolean, "|" is "or" (and not bitwise), so if the first operator is true, it will always be true.
Related
In JavaScript and Java, the equals operator (== or ===) has a higher precedence than the OR operator (||). Yet both languages (JS, Java) support short-circuiting in if statements:
When we have if(true || anything()), anything() isn't evaluated.
You can also have the following expression: true || foo == getValue()) - for example in an output statement such as console.log(...);, or in an assignment.
Now, according to operator precedence, short-circuiting shouldn't happen, as === = == > || in terms of precedence. (In other words, the comparison should happen first, for which getValue() ought to be called, as the equality check has a higher precedence that the OR comparison.) But it does. getValue() isn't called (as can easily be checked by putting an output statement into its body).
Why (does short circuiting work when the operator precedence says it shouldn't)?
Or am I confusing matters?
Or am I confusing matters?
You are. I think it's much simpler to think about precedence as grouping than ordering. It affects the order of evaluation, but only because it changes the grouping.
I don't know about Javascript for sure, but in Java operands are always evaluated in left-to-right order. The fact that == has higher precedence than || just means that
true || foo == getValue()
is evaluated as
true || (foo == getValue())
rather than
(true || foo) == getValue()
If you just think about precedence in that way, and then consider that evaluation is always left-to-right (so the left operand of || is always evaluated before the right operand, for example) then everything's simple - and getValue() is never evaluated due to short-circuiting.
To remove short-circuiting from the equation, consider this example instead:
A + B * C
... where A, B and C could just be variables, or they could be other expressions such as method calls. In Java, this is guaranteed to be evaluated as:
Evaluate A (and remember it for later)
Evaluate B
Evaluate C
Multiply the results of evaluating B and C
Add the result of evaluating A with the result of the multiplication
Note how even though * has higher precedence than +, A is still evaluated before either B or C. If you want to think of precedence in terms of ordering, note how the multiplication still happens before the addition - but it still fulfills the left-to-right evaluation order too.
According to the language specification, https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/jls-15.html#jls-15.24
At run time, the left-hand operand expression is evaluated first; if the result has type Boolean, it is subjected to unboxing conversion (§5.1.8).
If the resulting value is true, the value of the conditional-or expression is true and the right-hand operand expression is not evaluated.
So if you have a || b==c, it is not interpreted as (a || b) == c, because || has lower precedence, as you found in the tutorial. Instead, it is interpreted as a || (b==c). Now since a is the left side of ||, it is evaluated first.
There is no operator precedence in this case. What you are questioning is like in f(callback) statement the callback function being evaluated even before f. This can not happen.
On the other hand, in JS the || is one of the few places where you can watch laziness at show. The == operand (think as if it is an infix function like in fully functional languages) takes two arguments and the one on the left gets evaluated first. If it resolves to true the second argument doesn't even get evaluated.
Please have a look at the following code:
int i=5;
boolean b = i<5 && ++i<5;//line 2
System.out.println(i);//line 3, prints 5
In line 2, according to my understanding: Since among all the operators, ++ has highest precedence ++i should be evaluated first. But line 3 actually is printing i=5 (and not 6). Meaning, && has evaluated before ++ operator. How is it possible?
EDIT: From the answers I see that "In Java, all expressions are evaluated from left to right.". But when does actually precedence order comes into play. In following code:
int a=1,b=1,c=1;
boolean b = a==b&&b==c;//Line2
In line2 code would't just run from left to right. First a==b is evaluated then b==c and then && operator. Can you please explain more?
That's not how the expression is processed.
In Java, all expressions are evaluated from left to right. Operator precedence only comes into play when considering the evaluation of the arguments of &&.
So i < 5 is computed before ++i < 5 is even considered.
In this case ++i < 5 will not be evaluated, since i < 5 is false. So i stays at 5.
The key is: ++ has the highest precedence inside a expression, but the sentence boolean b = i<5 && ++i<5 has two expressions evaluated from left to right.
Think of b = i<5 && ++i<5 like:
if( i<5 ){
if ( ++i<5 ){
return true;
}
}
Considering your edited answer, the second code snippet also evaluates from left to right.
In both cases there is an expression of the form A && B with A as the left argument and B as the right argument of &&.
Here is where "left-to-right" applies. First, the left expression A is evaluated. In your first code snippet, that is i<5 and since this expression evaluates to false, the second argument to that isn't even considered, since the whole expression will evaluate to false (short-circuiting).
In your second snippet you have as left argument a==b. Since that evaluates to true, only now the second argument is considered, which also evaluates to true. That leaves you with true && true which can then be processed further.
Your misunderstanding is in how the '&&' works. When you use them java uses short circuit or lazy evaluation.
boolean equal = 1==1 && 1==2 java evaluates the 1==1 sees it as true, checks the ampersands and has to evaluate the 1==2 which is false and therefore equal is false.
boolean equal = 1==2 && 1==1 java evaluates the 1==2 sees it as false, then checks the ampersands and can see that whether the next expression is true or false the outcome is the same, that equal is false. Therefor it never evaluates the second equation.
More plainly the second example is saying boolean equal = false & true. This can only be true if both are true. Thus knowing the first is false is all we need to know the outcome. By ignoring the sencond expression at this point we can save needless calculations.
I know that the Bitwise operators &, | and ^ are EITHER bitwise operators OR logical operators ... depending on the types of the operands.
If the operands are integers, the operators are bitwise. If they are
booleans, then the operators are logical.
Then why there are Logical operators &&,|| and! ? I believe there will be some situations where we can use only logical operator, and so they are.
So, can anyone explain such a situation? Or any advantage over bitwise ops.
Operators && and || evaluates lazily. This means that only one side might be evaluated.
Operators & and | evaluates eagerly, this means that always both sides are evaluated.
It is very important when you expressions have side effects.
Examples
x = 0;
(x++ == 0) || (x++ == 1); // x is 1
x = 0;
(x++ == 0) | (x++ == 1); // x is 2
Logical operators &&,|| etc let you short circuit the logic.
1==1 || complexMethod(/*param*/)
complexMethod() will not execute.
1==1 | complexMethod(/*param*/)
complexMethod() will execute.
Short circuiting basically means the condition will be evaluated only up to where it is necessary and not beyond that.
Uses in Short-circuit evaluation like
Ex:
see &&
if(Condition1 && condition2){
}
and ||
if(Condition1 || condition2){
}
in these cases
in which the second argument is only executed or evaluated if the first argument does not suffice to determine the value of the expression:
This question already has answers here:
Closed 11 years ago.
Possible Duplicates:
logical operators in java
What's the difference between | and || in Java?
As the title says, I need to know the difference between & operator and && operator.
Can anyone help me in simple words.
How do they differ from each other?
And which one to be used in a IF statement?
There are in fact three "and" operators:
a && b, with a and b being boolean: evaluate a. If true, evaluate b. If true, result is true. Otherwise, result is false. (I.e. b is not evaluated if a is not true.)
a & b, with a and b being boolean: evaluate both, do logical and (i.e. true only if both are true).
a & b, where a and b are both integral types (int, long, short, char, byte): evaluate a and b, and do a bitwise AND.
The second one can be viewed as a special type of the third one, if one sees boolean as a one-bit integral type ;-)
As the top-level condition of an if-statement you can use the first two, but the first one is most likely useful. (I.e. there are not many cases where you really need the second and the first would do something wrong, but the other way around is more common. In most cases the first is simply a little bit faster.)
If the first result is FALSE, && doesn't evaluate the second result. & does.
&& only evaluates the second expression if the first operation is true. & evaluates both expressions (even if the first expression is false and there is no point in evaluating the second expression). Hence && is a tiny bit faster than & in logical operations. Hence && is also known as short-circuit and.
& can also be used as a bitwise operator in addition to a logical operator. So you can do a 'Bit And' of 2 numbers like for example
int result = 1 & 3; // will evaluate to 1
&& cannot be used as a bit-and operator.
For conditional IF operator, use &&. It is a tiny bit faster than just &.
I have the following code:
if(!partialHits.get(req_nr).containsKey(z) || partialHits.get(req_nr).get(z) < tmpmap.get(z)){
partialHits.get(z).put(z, tmpmap.get(z));
}
where partialHits is a HashMap. What will happen if the first statement is true? Will Java still check the second statement? Because in order the first statement to be true, the HashMap should not contain the given key, so if the second statement is checked, I will get NullPointerException.
So in simple words, if we have the following code
if(a && b)
if(a || b)
would Java check b if a is false in the first case and if a is true in the second case?
No, it will not be evaluated. And this is very useful. For example, if you need to test whether a String is not null or empty, you can write:
if (str != null && !str.isEmpty()) {
doSomethingWith(str.charAt(0));
}
or, the other way around
if (str == null || str.isEmpty()) {
complainAboutUnusableString();
} else {
doSomethingWith(str.charAt(0));
}
If we didn't have 'short-circuits' in Java, we'd receive a lot of NullPointerExceptions in the above lines of code.
Java has 5 different boolean compare operators: &, &&, |, ||, ^
& and && are "and" operators, | and || "or" operators, ^ is "xor"
The single ones will check every parameter, regardless of the values, before checking the values of the parameters.
The double ones will first check the left parameter and its value and if true (||) or false (&&) leave the second one untouched.
Sound compilcated? An easy example should make it clear:
Given for all examples:
String aString = null;
AND:
if (aString != null & aString.equals("lala"))
Both parameters are checked before the evaluation is done and a NullPointerException will be thrown for the second parameter.
if (aString != null && aString.equals("lala"))
The first parameter is checked and it returns false, so the second paramter won't be checked, because the result is false anyway.
The same for OR:
if (aString == null | !aString.equals("lala"))
Will raise NullPointerException, too.
if (aString == null || !aString.equals("lala"))
The first parameter is checked and it returns true, so the second paramter won't be checked, because the result is true anyway.
XOR can't be optimized, because it depends on both parameters.
No it will not be checked. This behaviour is called short-circuit evaluation and is a feature in many languages including Java.
All the answers here are great but, just to illustrate where this comes from, for questions like this it's good to go to the source: the Java Language Specification.
Section 15:23, Conditional-And operator (&&), says:
The && operator is like & (§15.22.2), but evaluates its right-hand operand only if the value of its left-hand operand is true. [...] At run time, the left-hand operand expression is evaluated first [...] if the resulting value is false, the value of the conditional-and expression is false and the right-hand operand expression is not evaluated. If the value of the left-hand operand is true, then the right-hand expression is evaluated [...] the resulting value becomes the value of the conditional-and expression. Thus, && computes the same result as & on boolean operands. It differs only in that the right-hand operand expression is evaluated conditionally rather than always.
And similarly, Section 15:24, Conditional-Or operator (||), says:
The || operator is like | (§15.22.2), but evaluates its right-hand operand only if the value of its left-hand operand is false. [...] At run time, the left-hand operand expression is evaluated first; [...] if the resulting value is true, the value of the conditional-or expression is true and the right-hand operand expression is not evaluated. If the value of the left-hand operand is false, then the right-hand expression is evaluated; [...] the resulting value becomes the value of the conditional-or expression. Thus, || computes the same result as | on boolean or Boolean operands. It differs only in that the right-hand operand expression is evaluated conditionally rather than always.
A little repetitive, maybe, but the best confirmation of exactly how they work. Similarly the conditional operator (?:) only evaluates the appropriate 'half' (left half if the value is true, right half if it's false), allowing the use of expressions like:
int x = (y == null) ? 0 : y.getFoo();
without a NullPointerException.
Short circuit here means that the second condition won't be evaluated.
If ( A && B ) will result in short circuit if A is False.
If ( A && B ) will not result in short Circuit if A is True.
If ( A || B ) will result in short circuit if A is True.
If ( A || B ) will not result in short circuit if A is False.
No, if a is true (in a or test), b will not be tested, as the result of the test will always be true, whatever is the value of the b expression.
Make a simple test:
if (true || ((String) null).equals("foobar")) {
...
}
will not throw a NullPointerException!
No it won't, Java will short-circuit and stop evaluating once it knows the result.
Yes, the short-circuit evaluation for boolean expressions is the default behaviour in all the C-like family.
An interesting fact is that Java also uses the & and | as logic operands (they are overloaded, with int types they are the expected bitwise operations) to evaluate all the terms in the expression, which is also useful when you need the side-effects.
This goes back to the basic difference between & and &&, | and ||
BTW you perform the same tasks many times. Not sure if efficiency is an issue. You could remove some of the duplication.
Z z2 = partialHits.get(req_nr).get(z); // assuming a value cannout be null.
Z z3 = tmpmap.get(z); // assuming z3 cannot be null.
if(z2 == null || z2 < z3){
partialHits.get(z).put(z, z3);
}