db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Van Couvering <David.Vancouver...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: [jira] Updated: (DERBY-243) connection toString should uniquely identify the connection
Date Tue, 10 May 2005 18:52:24 GMT
Hey, Dan, for some reason I missed this email previously, or I wouldn't 
have proposed using hashcode.   I think you put the final nail in the 
coffin :)

I am working on a more complete response to your last email, I'm trying 
to think this all through :)


Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
> Jack Klebanoff wrote:
>>If the Derby client absolutely requires that its Connection class
>>toString methods return unique, that is if the client would fail to work
>>if toString() were not unique, then we could toString could not use
>>identityHashCode. However, I do not believe that this is the case. I
>>think that uniqueness is very helpful but not required.
>>It is true that identityHashCode is not guaranteed to be unique.
>>However, in practice it almost always is unique.
> I'm not sure about that. If the identity hash code maps to a memory
> address then the fact that the object's hashcode has to remain fixed
> over time and objects can be moved in memory mean that two objects could
>  end up with the same hash code. Ie. the are created at different times
> but at the same address, since the first object created has been moved.
> Dan.

View raw message