Re: [Phptmapi-discuss] Fwd: Re: Construct::equals() and Construct::hashCode()

[Johannes S. <top...@fr...>]

Hi Lars, hi all,

I think that preserving the status quo is ok. Obviously, the method 
names cause specific expectations for, at least, Java people as equals() 
and hashCode() are Java natives. We could change
equals() to equalsConstruct() and
hashCode() to constructHashCode()

to be more precise/explicit.

Best regards,
Johannes

Lars Heuer schrieb:
> Forgot to include the list.... again...
>
>
> This is a forwarded message
>
> Date: Friday, February 5, 2010 4:11:31 PM
> Subject: [Phptmapi-discuss] Construct::equals() and Construct::hashCode()
>
> ===8<==============Original message text===============
>
> Hi Johannes,
>
> [...]
>   
>>> Well, my proposal was to remove hashCode() and equals() since they
>>> wouldn't be used by PHP anyway (i.e. if something is added as key to
>>> an array), but the behaviour of the implementations must be
>>> predictable of course (c.f. unit tests).
>>>       
>
>   
>> not sure what you mean by "predictable". Do you have an example?
>>     
>
> predictable: All implementations must behave the same. You wrote in
> another e-mail:
>
>     """
>     [...] comparison of objects is then delegated to implementors
>     """
>
> I just wanted to ensure this does not open the door for
> incompatibilities between implementations.
>
> Best regards,
> Lars
>