Java NPE in ternary operator with autoboxing?

Question

I ran across a very weird NPE this morning, and reduced it to a simple example. Is this a JVM bug or correct behavior?

public class Test1 {
    class Item {
        Integer id = null;
        public Integer getId() {return id;}
    }   
    public Integer f() {
        Item item = new Item();
        // this works:
        //return item == null ? new Integer(1) : item.getId();

        // NPE??
        return item == null ? 1 : item.getId();
    }   
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        Test1 t = new Test1();
        System.out.println("id is: " + String.valueOf(t.f()));
    }   
}

Output from compile and run:

$ javac Test1.java 
$ java Test1
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NullPointerException
at Test1.f(Test1.java:12)
at Test1.main(Test1.java:16)
$

that'a a good catch with autoboxing. This is why popular best practices recommend to use primitive type over wrapper. — Cygnusx1, Oct 18 '11 at 18:15
Very similar to [strange Java NullPointerException with autoboxing](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3265948/strange-java-nullpointerexception-with-autoboxing) — Pops, Apr 30 '12 at 17:14

Jack Edmonds · Accepted Answer · 2011-10-18T18:16:36.703

The type of the expression item == null ? 1 : item.getId() is int not Integer. Therefore, Java needs to auto-unbox your Integer to an int (causing the NullPointerException). Then it auto-boxes the result back to an Integer (well it would if not for the NullPointerException) to return from the method.

On the other hand, the expression item == null ? new Integer(1) : item.getId() has a type of Integer and no auto-unboxing needs to be done.

When you auto-unbox a null Integer, you get a NullPointerException (see Autoboxing) and that is what you are experiencing.

To answer your question, this is correct behavior.

nicholas.hauschild · Answer 2 · 2011-10-18T18:12:29.270

3

item may not be null, but when you call getId(), that is returning null. When you try to auto-unbox null, you get an NPE.

edited Oct 18 '11 at 18:12

answered Oct 18 '11 at 18:02

nicholas.hauschild

42,483
9
127
120

Are you sure? getId returns an Integer that happens to be null, so there should be no autoboxing. And if what you say is true then why does returning `new Integer(1)` make the NPE go away? – Kevin Oct 18 '11 at 18:05
6

@Kevin With `new Integer(1)`, both the 2nd and 3rd operands are of type `Integer`, so that's the type of the conditional. With `1`, the type of the conditional expression is `int`, so `getId()`'s return value is unboxed to an `int`. (Check 15.25 of the JLS for the exact rules around this.) – dlev Oct 18 '11 at 18:07

score 3 · Answer 3 · answered Oct 18 '11 at 18:08

3

If you decompile the class file you will see clearly your NPE...

return Integer.valueOf(item != null ? item.getId().intValue() : 1);

answered Oct 18 '11 at 18:08

smp7d

4,947
2
26
48

score 2 · Answer 4 · answered Oct 18 '11 at 18:08

The return type below is Integer -

public Integer f() {
    Item item = new Item();
    // this works:
    //return item == null ? new Integer(1) : item.getId();

    // NPE??
    return item == null ? 1 : item.getId();
}

And the result of the following -

item == null ? 1 : item.getId()

is null in your case.

So, JVM is throwing NPE because it is trying to autobox null.

Try -

new Integer(null); // and
Integer.valueOf(null);

both will throw NPE.

score 2 · Answer 5 · answered Oct 18 '11 at 18:11

It happens because you are using conditional operator ?. Line

return item == null ? 1 : item.getId();

is equivalent to

int result = item == null ? 1 : item.getId();
return result;

The result is int because of the first operand in your expression. This is the reason that your code works when you explicitly wrap 1 with Integer. In this case the compiler creates something like

Integer result = item == null ? new Integer(1) : item.getId();
return result;

So, NPE happens when attempting to "cast" item.getId() (that is null) to int.

Java NPE in ternary operator with autoboxing?

5 Answers5

Linked

Related