Comments on: Object.equals() http://www.symphonious.net/2004/08/30/objectequals/ Living in a state of accord. Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:31:23 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Anonymous http://www.symphonious.net/2004/08/30/objectequals/#comment-761 Anonymous Thu, 17 Mar 2005 17:57:04 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=211#comment-761 It's all in the JavaDox and the Java Language Specification. Also, a lot of examples can be found in the JDK source code. In the Object.equals() JavaDoc it says "Note that it is generally necessary to override the hashCode method whenever this method is overridden, so as to maintain the general contract for the hashCode method, which states that equal objects must have equal hash codes." The only article I read covering this was the one in JavaWorld. Byron Ellacott instead thinks, the JavaWorld article is total crap (that's how I got it after reading his blog). Just my 2 cents. Anonmous It’s all in the JavaDox and the Java Language Specification. Also, a lot of examples can be found in the JDK source code.
In the Object.equals() JavaDoc it says “Note that it is generally necessary to override the hashCode method whenever this method is overridden, so as to maintain the general contract for the hashCode method, which states that equal objects must have equal hash codes.”

The only article I read covering this was the one in JavaWorld. Byron Ellacott instead thinks, the JavaWorld article is total crap (that’s how I got it after reading his blog).

Just my 2 cents.

Anonmous

]]> By: Pinocio http://www.symphonious.net/2004/08/30/objectequals/#comment-207 Pinocio Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=211#comment-207 You are absolutly correct. It is surpising how often people don't see it! That getClass() comparison even recently made it in JavaWorld and both the author and the editor refused to retract it. Amasing! You are absolutly correct.
It is surpising how often people don’t see it! That getClass() comparison even recently made it in JavaWorld and both the author and the editor refused to retract it. Amasing!

]]> By: Leo http://www.symphonious.net/2004/08/30/objectequals/#comment-208 Leo Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=211#comment-208 The usual problem with semantics: What does it mean that two objects are equal? Does class matter? If so, it should be part of equals(). If not, it shouldn't. I can think of many times when you want to adhere to the superclass's definition, and many times when it would have been madness to do so. The usual problem with semantics: What does it mean that two objects are equal?

Does class matter? If so, it should be part of equals(). If not, it shouldn’t. I can think of many times when you want to adhere to the superclass’s definition, and many times when it would have been madness to do so.

]]> By: Byron Ellacott http://www.symphonious.net/2004/08/30/objectequals/#comment-209 Byron Ellacott Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=211#comment-209 Excerpt: "Andrae and Adrian both offer different perspectives on defining the equals method for Java classes. I say they're both wrong. And, they're both right." Excerpt:

“Andrae and Adrian both offer different perspectives on defining the equals method for Java classes. I say they’re both wrong.

And, they’re both right.”

]]>