1 /*
2 DescendantToken
3 limitedTokens = STRING_LITERAL
4 minimumDepth = (default)0
5 maximumDepth = 1
6 minimumNumber = (default)0
7 maximumNumber = 0
8 sumTokenCounts = (default)false
9 minimumMessage = (default)null
10 maximumMessage = Literal Strings should be compared using equals(), not ''==''.
11 tokens = EQUAL, NOT_EQUAL
12
13
14 */
15
16 package com.puppycrawl.tools.checkstyle.checks.descendanttoken;
17
18 public class InputDescendantTokenStringLiteralEquality
19 {
20 void foo(String name)
21 {
22 if (name == "Lars") // violation 'Literal Strings .* be compared using equals(), not '==''
23 {
24 // flagged, should use equals
25 }
26
27 if ("Oleg" == name) // violation 'Literal Strings .* be compared using equals(), not '==''
28 {
29 // flagged, should use equals
30 }
31
32 if ("Oliver" == "Oliver") // violation 'Lit.* Strings .* compared using equals(), not '==''
33 {
34 // doesn't make much sense because this can be evaluated
35 // to true at compile-time, but is flagged anyway
36 }
37
38 String compare = "Rick";
39 if (name == compare)
40 {
41 // currently not flagged.
42 //
43 // Implementing this is very complicated, we would need
44 // - type info on the == operands
45 // - prevent false alarms where the user explicitly wants
46 // to compare object identities
47 //
48 // My current feeling is that we should leave finding
49 // this one to manual code inspections. After all MCI is
50 // what some of us get paid for :-)
51 }
52
53 if ("Rick".toUpperCase(java.util.Locale.getDefault())
54 == "Rick".toLowerCase(java.util.Locale.getDefault()))
55 {
56 // completely dynamic, don't flag
57 }
58 }
59 }