[forge-dev] in forge java model, are two different implementations of the same java class equal?

[John Franey]

I agree.  Here is the impact on the implementation.

First, equals/hashcode cannot depend on internals of their class, instead
they must be implemented in terms of the public methods of the java model
interface.  JavaClassImplOne and JavaClassImplTwo would have different
internal variables.

Second, equals cannot fail if the compared objects are not the same class,
e.g. JavaClassImplOne and JavaClassImplTwo.  e.g., use
other.isAssignable(JavaClass.class).

Third, equals/hashcode implementations that depend only on the methods of
the java model api would probably not belong in the impl package.  They
would probably be better located in the api package.   Then
JavaClassImplTwo would not have to depend on impl.JavaClass to share
equals/hashcode.  This would mean that some interfaces in api package would
have to be abstract classes.

Others?

Thoughts?

Regards,
John


On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 1:45 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald at redhat.com>wrote:

> IMHO, equals should return true in this case only if the class structure
> (including attributes, interfaces, methods) matches. The fact that a class
> is editable or not shouldn't matter in terms of comparison.
>
> Em 23/02/2013, às 15:38, John Franey <jjfraney at gmail.com> escreveu:
>
> >
> > This is with respect to providing an alternate java model implementation
> for binary classes defined in other projects.
> >
> > Given two JavaClass with exactly the same java definition, but one comes
> from source code, and the other from a binary class file, (or in other
> terms, one is editable, the other is not), would
> (javaClass1.equals(javaClass2) == true)?
> >
> > It likely does not matter in practice.  The likelihood of a forge
> developer creating as source class with a definition exactly like a binary
> dependency seems very low, not impossible, but low.
> >
> >
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > forge-dev mailing list
> > forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/forge-dev/attachments/20130223/62db3502/attachment.html