What Does "String Literal in Condition" Mean

What does string literal in condition mean?

You have to specify the full condition on both sides of the or.

if response == "a" or response == "A"

The two sides of the or are not connected; Ruby makes no assumptions about what's on the right based on what's on the left. If the right side is the bare string "A", well, anything other than false or nil is considered "true", so the whole expression evaluates as "true" all the time. But Ruby notices that it's a string and not actually a boolean value, suspects you might not have specified what you meant to, and so issues the warning in the question.

You can also use a case expression to make it simpler to do multiple tests against a single value; if you supply a list of multiple possibilities in a single when, they are effectively ored together:

case response
  when "a","A"
    puts "ok"
  when "b","B"
    puts "awesome."
  else
    puts "I'm sorry. I did not get that.  Please try again."
end

For the specific situation of ignoring alphabetic case, you could also just convert to either upper or lower before testing:

case response.upcase 
  when "A"
    puts "ok"
  when "B"
    puts "awesome."
  else
    puts "I'm sorry, I did not get that.  Please try again."
 end

warning: string literal in condition

change input == "N" || "n"

to

input == "N" || input == "n"

You must also use else if instead of else

The warning is saying that instead of a boolean or test, you have a string literal, ' n', which always evaluates to true.

String literal in condition

A correction to the code especially where you are using OR condition should mute the Warning

if ['Married','MARRIED'].include?(sheet_marital_status)
personnel.marital_status = 'Married'
elsif ['Unmarried','UNMARRIED'].include?(sheet_marital_status)
personnel.marital_status = 'Unmarried'
elsif ['Unknown','UNKNOWN'].include?(sheet_marital_status)
personnel.marital_status = 'Unknown'
else
personnel.marital_status = columns[1].to_s.chomp.strip
end

Because if you use 'XXX' or 'xxx', it always evaluates to 'XXX'. Which means you are comparing sheet_marital_status with only the first string. And that's probably what the compiler warning is indicating. You better use Include.

lemme know your findings too.

Ruby warning: string literal in condition

Change

if userAgree == 'Y' or 'y'

to

if userAgree == 'Y' or userAgree == 'y'

Or, cleaner and clearer in my opinion:

if userAgree.upcase() == 'Y'

Ruby ternary - warning: string literal in condition

Without parentheses, ruby is interpreting it as

phrase.last.eql?( "?" ? true : false )

which explains the message "warning: string literal in condition".

To fix this, use parentheses on the parameter:

phrase.last.eql?("?") ? true : false

Of course, in this case using the ternary operator is redundant since this is the same as simply

phrase.last.eql?("?")

String literals in Java

My question is: How can 's', which holds a reference, be compared to the actual string "Hello" which is a character sequence?

"Hello" is not a character sequence. It's a String. (String does implement the CharSequence interface, but that's not the same thing.) So by the time you're using equals or ==, you're comparing String instances, not some special thing. A String literal is a String (complete with a reference to it where the literal was written in the source).

It seemed at first as though you were confused about equals and ==. Re-reading, I'm not sure you are, but just in case: equals compares two objects for equivalence; if the two objects are Strings, it returns true if they have the same sequence of characters. == compares two object references and evaluates true if they point to the same object. == is sometimes true for what seem to be different String objects because String literals are implicitly intern'd (put in a common pool and reused from it) to save memory, and so two separate but equivalent literals actually do end up referring to the same object. Never rely on that. Using == to compare Strings is almost always an error (the cases where it isn't are very much edge-cases). Use equals.

Expected string literal in condition express in Jenkins pipeline

This error is thrown by the pipeline syntax validator that runs before your pipeline code gets executed. The reason you see this error is the following:

Only "agent none", "agent any" or "agent {...}" are allowed. @ line 6, column 13.

This is the constraint for the label section. It means that the following values are valid:

• agent any
• agent none
• agent "constant string value here"
• agent { ... }

When you pass something like:

• agent "${map.agent ?: 'any'}
• agent(map.agent ?: 'any')

you are getting Expected string literal because any form of an expression is not allowed in this place, including interpolated GStrings of any form.

Solution

There is a way to define pipeline agent dynamically however. All you have to do is to use a closure block with the label set to either expression or empty string (an equivalent of agent any in this case.)

pipeline {
    agent {
        label map.agent ?: ''
    }

    stages {
        ...
    }
}

The label section allows you to use any expression, so map.agent is a valid construction here. Just remember to use an empty string instead of "any" - otherwise Jenkins will search for a node labeled as "any".

Rake: warning: string literal in condition

you get this warning when you evaluate a plain string like after you && because it will ALWAYS be true!

irb(main):003:0> puts "blupp" if "bla"
(irb):3: warning: string literal in condition
blupp
=> nil

What's the meaning of plain string when using as condition?

From http://perldoc.perl.org/perldata.html

Barewords

A word that has no other interpretation in the grammar will be treated
as if it were a quoted string. These are known as "barewords".

---

Related Topics