cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Glen Ezkovich <>
Subject Re: [CForms] Repeater: why not hashCode for id?
Date Tue, 29 Mar 2005 05:48:37 GMT

On Mar 28, 2005, at 12:12 PM, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:

> Glen Ezkovich wrote:
>> On Mar 28, 2005, at 6:35 AM, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>> I'm sure you are aware of this and take this as you will, the general
>> contract for hashCode states that
>> "If two objects are equal according to the equals(Object)  method, 
>> then
>> calling the hashCode method on each of the two objects must produce 
>> the
>> same integer result."
>> So 2 distinct objects may have the same hashCode and it may be
>> necessary to bind 2 equal objects.
> Yes, that's true - but I - in the role of the application developer -
> know how hashCode works for my own objects. And from the JavaDocs for
> Object:
> "As much as is reasonably practical, the hashCode method defined by
> class Object does return distinct integers for distinct objects."
> So unless you have overwritten hashCode everything is fine.

Exactly. If I override equals, I override hashCode and I override 
equals for just about any class I would use to bind. (its a habit... 
what can I say)

> Now, I don't want that the repeater always relies on hashCode but
> perhaps as a default - if no identity is given for example. And
> everything else stays the same.

I can live with this but the documentation needs to be very explicit 
with this. It seems like an error waiting to happen. Sylvain's solution 
seems safer.

Glen Ezkovich
HardBop Consulting
glen at

A Proverb for Paranoids:
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to 
worry about answers."
- Thomas Pynchon Gravity's Rainbow

View raw message