[java] Best way to check for null values in Java?

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...
}

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

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");
    }
    //...
}

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){

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.

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).

For java 11+ you can use Objects.nonNull(Object obj)

if(nonNull(foo)){ 
//
}

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
}

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.

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.

If at all you going to check with double equal "==" then check null with object ref like

if(null == obj) 

instead of

if(obj == null)

because if you mistype single equal if(obj = null) it will return true (assigning object returns success (which is 'true' in value).

You also can use StringUtils.isNoneEmpty("") for check is null or empty.

• 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.

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");
}

Simple one line Code to check for null :

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

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