Best way to check for null values in Java?

Question

Before calling a function of an object, I need to check if the object is null, to avoid throwing a NullPointerException.

What is the best way to go about this? I've considered these methods.
Which one is the best programming practice for Java?

// Method 1
if (foo != null) {
    if (foo.bar()) {
        etc...
    }
}

// Method 2
if (foo != null ? foo.bar() : false) {
    etc...
}

// Method 3
try {
    if (foo.bar()) {
        etc...
    }
} catch (NullPointerException e) {
}

// Method 4 -- Would this work, or would it still call foo.bar()?
if (foo != null && foo.bar()) {
    etc...
}

Answer 1

Method 4 is best.

if(foo != null && foo.bar()) {
   someStuff();
}

will use short-circuit evaluation, meaning it ends if the first condition of a logical AND is false.

Answer 2

The last and the best one. i.e LOGICAL AND

  if (foo != null && foo.bar()) {
    etc...
}

Because in logical &&

it is not necessary to know what the right hand side is, the result must be false

Prefer to read :Java logical operator short-circuiting

Answer 3

Since java 8 you can use Objects.nonNull(Object obj)

if(nonNull(foo)){ 
//
}

Answer 4

• Do not catch NullPointerException. That is a bad practice. It is better to ensure that the value is not null.
• Method #4 will work for you. It will not evaluate the second condition, because Java has short-circuiting (i.e., subsequent conditions will not be evaluated if they do not change the end-result of the boolean expression). In this case, if the first expression of a logical AND evaluates to false, subsequent expressions do not need to be evaluated.

Answer 5

Method 4 is far and away the best as it clearly indicates what will happen and uses the minimum of code.

Method 3 is just wrong on every level. You know the item may be null so it's not an exceptional situation it's something you should check for.

Method 2 is just making it more complicated than it needs to be.

Method 1 is just method 4 with an extra line of code.

Answer 6

In Java 7, you can use Objects.requireNonNull(). Add an import of Objects class from java.util.

public class FooClass {
    //...
    public void acceptFoo(Foo obj) {
        //If obj is null, NPE is thrown
        Objects.requireNonNull(obj).bar(); //or better requireNonNull(obj, "obj is null");
    }
    //...
}

Answer 7

As others have said #4 is the best method when not using a library method. However you should always put null on the left side of the comparison to ensure you don't accidentally assign null to foo in case of typo. In that case the compiler will catch the mistake.

// You meant to do this
if(foo != null){

// But you made a typo like this which will always evaluate to true
if(foo = null)

// Do the comparison in this way
if(null != foo)

// So if you make the mistake in this way the compiler will catch it
if(null = foo){

// obviously the typo is less obvious when doing an equality comparison but it's a good habit either way
if(foo == null){
if(foo =  null){

Answer 8

I would say method 4 is the most general idiom from the code that I've looked at. But this always feels a bit smelly to me. It assumes foo == null is the same as foo.bar() == false.

That doesn't always feel right to me.

Answer 9

Method 4 is my preferred method. The short circuit of the && operator makes the code the most readable. Method 3, Catching NullPointerException, is frowned upon most of the time when a simple null check would suffice.

Answer 10

Simple one line Code to check for null :

namVar == null ? codTdoForNul() : codTdoForFul();

Answer 11

Update

I created a java library(Maven Dependency) for the java developers to remove this NullPointerException Hell from their code. Check out my repository.

NullUtil Repository

Generic Method to handle Null Values in Java

<script src="https://gist.github.com/rcvaram/f1a1b89193baa1de39121386d5f865bc.js"></script>

1. If that object is not null we are going to do the following things.

   a. We can mutate the object (I)

   b. We can return something(O) as output instead of mutating the object (I)

   c. we can do both

In this case, We need to pass a function which needs to take the input param(I) which is our object If we take it like that, then we can mutate that object if we want. and also that function may be something (O).

2. If an object is null then we are going to do the following things

   a. We may throw an exception in a customized way

   b. We may return something.

In this case, the object is null so we need to supply the value or we may need to throw an exception.

I take two examples.

1. If I want to execute trim in a String then that string should not be null. In that case, we have to additionally check the null value otherwise we will get NullPointerException

public String trimValue(String s){
   return s == null ? null : s.trim();
}

2. Another function which I want to set a new value to object if that object is not null otherwise I want to throw a runtime exception.

public void setTeacherAge(Teacher teacher, int age){
   if (teacher != null){
      teacher.setAge(age);
   } else{
      throw new RuntimeException("teacher is null")
    }
}

With my Explanation, I have created a generic method that takes the value(value may be null), a function that will execute if the object is not null and another supplier function that will execute if the object is null.

GenericFunction

  public <I, O> O setNullCheckExecutor(I value, Function<I, O> nonNullExecutor, Supplier<O> nullExecutor) {
        return value != null ? nonNullExecutor.apply(value) : nullExecutor.get();
    }

So after having this generic function, we can do as follow for the example methods 1.

//To Trim a value
        String trimmedValue = setNullCheckExecutor(value, String::trim, () -> null);

Here, the nonNullExecutor Function is trim the value (Method Reference is used). nullExecutorFunction is will return null since It is an identity function.

2.

// mutate the object if not null otherwise throw a custom message runtime exception instead of NullPointerException
 setNullCheckExecutor(teacher, teacher -> {
            teacher.setAge(19);
            return null;
        }, () -> {
            throw new RuntimeException("Teacher is null");
        });

Answer 12

You also can use ObjectUtils.isNotEmpty() to check if an Object is not empty and not null.

Answer 13

If you control the API being called, consider using Guava's Optional class

More info here. Change your method to return an Optional<Boolean> instead of a Boolean.

This informs the calling code that it must account for the possibility of null, by calling one of the handy methods in Optional

Answer 14

if you do not have an access to the commons apache library, the following probably will work ok

if(null != foo && foo.bar()) {
//do something
}

Answer 15

Your last proposal is the best.

if (foo != null && foo.bar()) {
    etc...
}

Because:

1. It is easier to read.
2. It is safe : foo.bar() will never be executed if foo == null.
3. It prevents from bad practice such as catching NullPointerExceptions (most of the time due to a bug in your code)
4. It should execute as fast or even faster than other methods (even though I think it should be almost impossible to notice it).

Answer 16

We can use Object.requireNonNull static method of Object class. Implementation is below

public void someMethod(SomeClass obj) {
    Objects.requireNonNull(obj, "Validation error, obj cannot be null");
}

Answer 17

public <T, U> U defaultGet(T supplier, Function<T, U> mapper, U defaultValue) {
        return Optional.ofNullable(supplier).map(mapper).orElse(defaultValue);

    }

You can create this function if you prefer function programming

Answer 18

Allot of times I look for null when processing a function -

public static void doSomething(Object nullOrNestedObject) {
     if (nullOrNestedObject == null || nullOrNestedObject.getNestedObject()) {
        log.warn("Invalid argument !" );
        return;
        // Or throw an exception
        // throw new IllegalArgumentException("Invalid argument!");

     }
    nullOrNestedObject.getNestedObject().process()
     ... // Do other function stuff
}

That way if it is null it just stops execution early, and you don't have to nest all of your logic in an if.

Answer 19

Since java 1.8, you can use Optional.ofNullable. This option will be good for more nested object.

You can use it like -

if (Optional.ofNullable(foo).map(Foo::bar).orElse(false)) {
    // TODO
}

Or -

if (Optional.ofNullable(foo).map(Foo::bar).ifPresent(bar -> {
    // TODO
});