A list of funny and tricky Apex examples
Inspired by wtfjs
Boolean b;
if(b!=true) system.debug('b is not true');
if(b!=false) system.debug('b is not false');
if(b){} //throws NPE exception
See Advanced Apex Programming in Salesforce for explanation.
String x = 'Abc';
String y = 'abc';
System.assert(x == y); // passes
System.assertEquals(x, y); // fails
See explanation on StackExchange
Nothing prevents you from recreating a class with the same name of one that exists in the System
(default) namespace.
public class Database {
public static List<sObject> query(String qry){
System.debug(qry);
return null;
}
}
Running Database.query('foo')
will call our new class (essentially overriding the Database methods)!?
The same principle also applies to standard SObjects:
public class Account { }
Account acc = new Account();
acc.AccountNumber = '123'; // Variable does not exist: AccountNumber
Source: Daniel Ballinger
public class IExist{}
System.assertEquals(IExist.class, IExist.IDont.Class); //passes
Source: Kevin Jones
This shouldn't work but it does. Apperently also works with batch.
public class StaticsAreCool implements Schedulable{
public static void execute(SchedulableContext sc){
}
}
Source: Kevin Jones
In their naming conventions:
public class OhGodBees extends Exception{}
//fails: OhGodBees: Classes extending Exception must have a name ending in 'Exception'
and their Constructors:
public class BeesException extends Exception{
public BeesException(){}
}
//fails: System exception constructor already defined: <Constructor>()
For explanation and further interesting observations, see Chris Peterson's blog post.
Database.query
is one of many cases where the Salesforce System
namespace doesn't play by its own rules. It can return either a List<SObject>
or a single SObject
. No casting required.
Foo__c foo = Database.Query('SELECT Id FROM Foo__c');
List<Foo__c> foos = Database.Query('SELECT Id FROM Foo__c');
Try writing your own method to do this and you'll get an error:
Method already defined: query SObject Database.query(String) from the type Database (7:27)
You can overload arguments, but not return
type.
The initialization sytax for List<T>
expects T ... args
.
So obviously, if you passed a List<T>
into it, you will get compile error:
List<Task>{new List<Task>()}; // Initial expression is of incorrect type, expected: Task but was: List<Task>
Except, if List comes from new Map<Id,T>().values()
...
The following code compiles without issue!
new List<Task>{new Map<Id,Task>().values()};
To add to the perplexity, when executed you will recieve the following runtime error:
System.QueryException: List has no rows for assignment to SObject
Source: Matt Bingham
If you write an If/Else without braces, symbols scoped in the "if" seem to leak into the "else":
if(false)
String a = 'Never going to happen.';
else
a = 'I should not compile';
Worth noting that Java won't even allow you to declare a block scoped variable inside a "braceless IF" as it can never be referenced elsewhere.
Source: Kevin Jones
Let's take a look at the standard Set
class...
It can be iterated in a foreach loop:
Set<String> mySet = new Set<String>{'a', 'b'};
for(String s : mySet){}
But, according to Salesforce (compiler & runtime), it does not actually implement the Iterable
interface:
String.join(mySet, ','); // Doesn't compile! "Method does not exist or incorrect signature: void join(Set<String>, String)..."
// Just to make sure, lets check at runtime..
System.assert(mySet instanceof Iterable<String>); // Yup, this fails! I guess Set really isn't an Iterable...
Except... It actually does:
String.join((Iterable<String>) mySet, ','); // this works!?
- There's no way to control automatic serialization of object properties (like
[JsonProperty(PropertyName = "FooBar")]
in C#) - There are reserved keywords that you can't use as property names.
Meaning the following cannot be parsed or generated using JSON.deserialize
or JSON.serialize
:
{
"msg": "hello dingus",
"from": "Dr. Dingus"
}
Once upon a time, generics were actually part of Apex. However, they have since been removed (with the exception of system classes (List<>
, Batchable<>
, etc).
Why would you want generics when your OS has perfectly good Copy & Paste functionality built right into it?
Object x = 42;
System.debug(x instanceOf Integer); // true
System.debug(x instanceOf Long); // true
System.debug(x instanceOf Double); // true
System.debug(x instanceOf Decimal); // true
Source: Daniel Ballinger
When you try this:
Http h = new Http();
HttpRequest req = new HttpRequest();
req.setEndpoint('hooli.com');
req.setMethod('PATCH');
HttpResponse res = h.send(req);
There is a workaround, but only supported by some servers.
Thankfully, these WTFs have since been fixed by Salesforce. We'll keep them documented for historical purposes (and entertainment).
https://twitter.com/FishOfPrey/status/869381316105588736
https://twitter.com/FishOfPrey/status/1016821563675459585
https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/questions/224490/bug-in-list-contains-for-id-data-type
Resolved in Spring '20 by the "Restrict Reflective Access to Non-Global Controller Constructors in Packages" Critical Update
public abstract class ImAbstract {
public String foo;
}
ImAbstract orAmI = (ImAbstract) JSON.deserialize('{"foo":"bar"}', ImAbstract.class);
System.debug(orAmI.foo);