Is Java string hashcode independent of locale?

The Locale does not affect the hashCode of the String (directly). It is solely based on the chars stored in the String. The hashCode is generated by.

The Locale does not affect the hashCode of the String (directly). It is solely based on the chars stored in the String. The hashCode is generated by char val; for (int I = 0; I If it is, for example, the result of toUpperCase, which depends on Locale, obviously the resulting String is dependent on Locale and so is the hashCode.

Good question, I ran a quick test and it seems changing the default locale does not (thankfully) change the hashcode ... import java.util. Locale; public class HashCodeTester { public static void main(String args) { String test = "test"; int hashCode = test.hashCode(); System.out. Println("hashcode " + hashCode + " - locale " + Locale.getDefault() + ""); Locale availableLocales = Locale.

GetAvailableLocales(); for(int i=0; iPrintln("hashcode " + test.hashCode() + " - locale " + Locale.getDefault() + ""); } } } Output is hashcode 3556498 - locale en_IE hashcode 3556498 - locale ja_JP hashcode 3556498 - locale es_PE hashcode 3556498 - locale en hashcode 3556498 - locale ja_JP_JP hashcode 3556498 - locale es_PA hashcode 3556498 - locale sr_BA hashcode 3556498 - locale mk hashcode 3556498 - locale es_GT hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_AE hashcode 3556498 - locale no_NO hashcode 3556498 - locale sq_AL hashcode 3556498 - locale bg hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_IQ hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_YE hashcode 3556498 - locale hu hashcode 3556498 - locale pt_PT hashcode 3556498 - locale el_CY hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_QA hashcode 3556498 - locale mk_MK hashcode 3556498 - locale sv hashcode 3556498 - locale de_CH hashcode 3556498 - locale en_US hashcode 3556498 - locale fi_FI hashcode 3556498 - locale is hashcode 3556498 - locale cs hashcode 3556498 - locale en_MT hashcode 3556498 - locale sl_SI hashcode 3556498 - locale sk_SK hashcode 3556498 - locale it hashcode 3556498 - locale tr_TR hashcode 3556498 - locale zh hashcode 3556498 - locale th hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_SA hashcode 3556498 - locale no hashcode 3556498 - locale en_GB hashcode 3556498 - locale sr_CS hashcode 3556498 - locale lt hashcode 3556498 - locale ro hashcode 3556498 - locale en_NZ hashcode 3556498 - locale no_NO_NY hashcode 3556498 - locale lt_LT hashcode 3556498 - locale es_NI hashcode 3556498 - locale nl hashcode 3556498 - locale ga_IE hashcode 3556498 - locale fr_BE hashcode 3556498 - locale es_ES hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_LB hashcode 3556498 - locale ko hashcode 3556498 - locale fr_CA hashcode 3556498 - locale et_EE hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_KW hashcode 3556498 - locale sr_RS hashcode 3556498 - locale es_US hashcode 3556498 - locale es_MX hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_SD hashcode 3556498 - locale in_ID hashcode 3556498 - locale ru hashcode 3556498 - locale lv hashcode 3556498 - locale es_UY hashcode 3556498 - locale lv_LV hashcode 3556498 - locale iw hashcode 3556498 - locale pt_BR hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_SY hashcode 3556498 - locale hr hashcode 3556498 - locale et hashcode 3556498 - locale es_DO hashcode 3556498 - locale fr_CH hashcode 3556498 - locale hi_IN hashcode 3556498 - locale es_VE hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_BH hashcode 3556498 - locale en_PH hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_TN hashcode 3556498 - locale fi hashcode 3556498 - locale de_AT hashcode 3556498 - locale es hashcode 3556498 - locale nl_NL hashcode 3556498 - locale es_EC hashcode 3556498 - locale zh_TW hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_JO hashcode 3556498 - locale be hashcode 3556498 - locale is_IS hashcode 3556498 - locale es_CO hashcode 3556498 - locale es_CR hashcode 3556498 - locale es_CL hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_EG hashcode 3556498 - locale en_ZA hashcode 3556498 - locale th_TH hashcode 3556498 - locale el_GR hashcode 3556498 - locale it_IT hashcode 3556498 - locale ca hashcode 3556498 - locale hu_HU hashcode 3556498 - locale fr hashcode 3556498 - locale en_IE hashcode 3556498 - locale uk_UA hashcode 3556498 - locale pl_PL hashcode 3556498 - locale fr_LU hashcode 3556498 - locale nl_BE hashcode 3556498 - locale en_IN hashcode 3556498 - locale ca_ES hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_MA hashcode 3556498 - locale es_BO hashcode 3556498 - locale en_AU hashcode 3556498 - locale sr hashcode 3556498 - locale zh_SG hashcode 3556498 - locale pt hashcode 3556498 - locale uk hashcode 3556498 - locale es_SV hashcode 3556498 - locale ru_RU hashcode 3556498 - locale ko_KR hashcode 3556498 - locale vi hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_DZ hashcode 3556498 - locale vi_VN hashcode 3556498 - locale sr_ME hashcode 3556498 - locale sq hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_LY hashcode 3556498 - locale ar hashcode 3556498 - locale zh_CN hashcode 3556498 - locale be_BY hashcode 3556498 - locale zh_HK hashcode 3556498 - locale ja hashcode 3556498 - locale iw_IL hashcode 3556498 - locale bg_BG hashcode 3556498 - locale in hashcode 3556498 - locale mt_MT hashcode 3556498 - locale es_PY hashcode 3556498 - locale sl hashcode 3556498 - locale fr_FR hashcode 3556498 - locale cs_CZ hashcode 3556498 - locale it_CH hashcode 3556498 - locale ro_RO hashcode 3556498 - locale es_PR hashcode 3556498 - locale en_CA hashcode 3556498 - locale de_DE hashcode 3556498 - locale ga hashcode 3556498 - locale de_LU hashcode 3556498 - locale de hashcode 3556498 - locale es_AR hashcode 3556498 - locale sk hashcode 3556498 - locale ms_MY hashcode 3556498 - locale hr_HR hashcode 3556498 - locale en_SG hashcode 3556498 - locale da hashcode 3556498 - locale mt hashcode 3556498 - locale pl hashcode 3556498 - locale ar_OM hashcode 3556498 - locale tr hashcode 3556498 - locale th_TH_TH hashcode 3556498 - locale el hashcode 3556498 - locale ms hashcode 3556498 - locale sv_SE hashcode 3556498 - locale da_DK hashcode 3556498 - locale es_HN.

I tried your code with specials characters (accents, etc...) and the hash code does not change according to the locale too. – JVerstry Aug 28 at 0:32.

The equals method on String clearly states that strings are only equal if they represent the same sequence of characters (that is, no conversions are going on here). While that does not guarantee that hashcode does not use locale information (in general it might), the implementation in the Oracle JVM looks like this: public int hashCode() { int h = hash; int len = count; if (h == 0 && len > 0) { int off = offset; char val = value; for (int I = 0; I.

The hashcode of a given String object does not depend on the locale. That should be obvious from the javadoc that you linked. However, any transformation that produces different characters in the string will lead to a different (non-equal) string and a different hashcode.

For instance, translating a bunch of bytes to a String using different default character encoding can result in different characters. Summary, changing Locale doesn't directly affect String hashcodes, but it could cause your application to produce different String values, and THAT will affect their hashcodes.

That indicates an unrecognised character. The actual behaviour for unrecognised input is "unspecified" if you are using (for instance) a String constructor to convert the bytes. – Stephen C Aug 29 at 13:48.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.