instanceof-不兼容的条件操作数类型

Question

The following compiles fine:

  Object o = new Object();
  System.out.println(o instanceof Cloneable);

But this doesn't:

  String s = new String();
  System.out.println(s instanceof Cloneable);

A compiler error is thrown.

What is the problem?

Answer 1

A related issue that I have come across recently (and which led me to this page, before I figured out what was going on) is that the Eclipse environment can report "Incompatible conditional operand types" in an 'instanceof' expression erroneously due to a missing 'import' statement for the type on the right of the 'instanceof'. I spent a while trying to figure out how the types in question could possibly be incompatible before figuring out that a missing import was causing the whole problem. Hopefully this information saves somebody some time.

Answer 2

A more blatant incarnation of your problem is the following:

if ("foo" instanceof Number)
   // "Incompatible conditional operand types String and Number"

This is specified in JLS 15.20.2 Type comparison operator instanceof :

 RelationalExpression: RelationalExpression instanceof ReferenceType 

If a cast of the RelationalExpression to the ReferenceType would be rejected as a compile-time error, then the instanceof relational expression likewise produces a compile-time error. In such a situation, the result of the instanceof expression could never be true.

That is, since this cast expression generates a compile time error:

(Number) "foo"

so must this expression:

("foo" instanceof Number)

---

Your case is a bit more subtle, but the principle is the same:

• String is a final class
• String does not implement Cloneable
• Therefore you can't do (Cloneable) aString
• Therefore also you can't do aString instanceof Cloneable

Answer 3

The compiler knows that String is a final class and doesn't implement Cloneable . So no instance of String can ever be an instance of Cloneable . It's stopping you from thinking you've got a meaningful test when actually it will always print "false".