On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 11:14 -0800, Per Bothner wrote: > Michael Barker wrote: > >>From the equals() code, its applicable in this case: > > > > // The toString output must match. > > if (! toString().equals(((KerberosPrincipal)that).toString())) > > return false; > > In your message you did phrase things in terms of general contracts.
True, my fault, I jumped context. > > More to the point: Using toString in the implementation of equals > seems like a bad idea. The only rationale I can think of is as a > hack to try to catch that the actual classes match. But it seems > an unreliable and inefficient method to do so. > > I'd go further: Implementing equals in terms of toString is a bug. > One should be able to change toString before better output or > debuggability without breaking equals. I agree, and the hashCode() method should follow suite. Regards, Michael Barker. _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
