New Integer vs valueOf

I was using Sonar to make my code cleaner, and it pointed out that I'm using new Integer(1) instead of Integer.valueOf(1). Because it seems that valueOf does not instantiate a new object so is more memory-friendly. How can valueOf not instantiate a new object? How does it work? 开发者_StackOverflowIs this true for all integers?

Integer.valueOf implements a cache for the values -128 to +127. See the last paragraph of the Java Language Specification, section 5.1.7, which explains the requirements for boxing (usually implemented in terms of the .valueOf methods).

http://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/jls-5.html#jls-5.1.7

From the JavaDoc:

public static Integer valueOf(int i) Returns a Integer instance representing the specified int value. If a new Integer instance is not required, this method should generally be used in preference to the constructor Integer(int), as this method is likely to yield significantly better space and time performance by caching frequently requested values.

ValueOf is generaly used for autoboxing and therefore (when used for autoboxing) caches at least values from -128 to 127 to follow the autoboxing specification.

Here is the valueOf implementation for Sun JVM 1.5.? Have a look at the whole class to see how the cache is initialized.

public static Integer valueOf(int i) {
    final int offset = 128;
    if (i >= -128 && i <= 127) { // must cache 
        return IntegerCache.cache[i + offset];
    }
    return new Integer(i);
}

they are pushing you to use valueOf() instead of new Integer() so the method valueOf() does it for you, and caches the value in case you want to get the same number again in future. In that case, method won't instatiate new Integer, but will give you the cached one, what will make 'creation' of new Integer a lot quicker and memory friendly process..

This way you may cause yourself alot of problems if you are unexperienced java programmer since you will conclude that Integer.valueOf(342)==Integer.valueOf(342), because you may (or may not) have the same pointer for two Integers, and probably you will practise it in a way, let's say, you learned in C#, so that will show you bugs from time to time, and you won't know how & where those came from...

From the java.lang.Integer Source Code. Integer cache is configurable. To configure the Integer cache size other than Sun we need to use the System property java.lang.Integer.IntegerCache.high as per the source code.

/**
 * Cache to support the object identity semantics of autoboxing for values between 
 * -128 and 127 (inclusive) as required by JLS.
 *
 * The cache is initialized on first usage. During VM initialization the
 * getAndRemoveCacheProperties method may be used to get and remove any system
 * properites that configure the cache size. At this time, the size of the
 * cache may be controlled by the vm option -XX:AutoBoxCacheMax=<size>.
 */

// value of java.lang.Integer.IntegerCache.high property (obtained during VM init)
private static String integerCacheHighPropValue;

static void getAndRemoveCacheProperties() {
    if (!sun.misc.VM.isBooted()) {
        Properties props = System.getProperties();
        integerCacheHighPropValue =
            (String)props.remove("java.lang.Integer.IntegerCache.high");
        if (integerCacheHighPropValue != null)
            System.setProperties(props);  // remove from system props
    }
}

private static class IntegerCache {
    static final int high;
    static final Integer cache[];

    static {
        final int low = -128;

        // high value may be configured by property
        int h = 127;
        if (integerCacheHighPropValue != null) {
            // Use Long.decode here to avoid invoking methods that
            // require Integer's autoboxing cache to be initialized
            int i = Long.decode(integerCacheHighPropValue).intValue();
            i = Math.max(i, 127);
            // Maximum array size is Integer.MAX_VALUE
            h = Math.min(i, Integer.MAX_VALUE - -low);
        }
        high = h;

        cache = new Integer[(high - low) + 1];
        int j = low;
        for(int k = 0; k < cache.length; k++)
            cache[k] = new Integer(j++);
    }

    private IntegerCache() {}
}

From java.lang.Short,java.lang.Byte and java.lang.Long creates a cache of 127 to -128

private static class LongCache {
    private LongCache() {
    }

    static final Long cache[] = new Long[-(-128) + 127 + 1];

    static {
        for (int i = 0; i < cache.length; i++)
            cache[i] = new Long(i - 128);
    }
}

private static class ShortCache {
    private ShortCache() {
    }

    static final Short cache[] = new Short[-(-128) + 127 + 1];

    static {
        for (int i = 0; i < cache.length; i++)
            cache[i] = new Short((short) (i - 128));
    }
}

private static class ByteCache {
    private ByteCache() {
    }

    static final Byte cache[] = new Byte[-(-128) + 127 + 1];

    static {
        for (int i = 0; i < cache.length; i++)
            cache[i] = new Byte((byte) (i - 128));
    }
}