Re: [hibernate-dev] [OGM] Option identity

2013/10/21 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; So he changed the implementation of Option / UniqueOption to behave like I > previously explained for generic options but to properly return > ShowSql.equals(ShowSql.FALSE) == false. To do so, he removed > getOptionIdentity() and manually ask (Unique)Option implementors to > implement equals. In his example equals for ShowSql would be based on the > value. > That's not quite right, maybe this already is the source of our disagreement. I only removed the final implementation of UniqueOption#getOptionIdentifier() (which was based on the specific sub-type of UniqueOption). Option#getOptionIdentifier() is still in place. So an option implementor has to implement getOptionIdentifier() in both cases, for unique and non-unique options. He doesn't have to implement equals() himself (which is implemented in the Option super-class and takes into account the specific option type and the result of getOptionIdentifier()). > > So we are at an impasse. > > I hate his approach as the equals behavior is inconsistent between generic > options and unique options. It's very confusing for an Option implementor > to figure out what equals should do. And ice on the cake, the implementor > has to implement equals / hashCode instead of delegating that to the > superclass: more code, more opportunities to screw it up. > As outlined above an option implementor only needs to provide getOptionIdentifier(). The only difference to the situation before is that he needs to provide that method for unique option types now, too. Does this alleviate your concerns about the proposed change?