[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-3173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=18018008#comment-18018008
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on TINKERPOP-3173:
-------------------------------------------
xiazcy commented on code in PR #3195:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/3195#discussion_r2320495814
##########
gremlin-core/src/main/java/org/apache/tinkerpop/gremlin/util/GremlinValueComparator.java:
##########
@@ -331,17 +307,74 @@ private static boolean naturallyComparable(final Object
f, final Object s) {
/**
* Return true if the two objects are of the same comparison type
(although they may not be the exact same Class)
*/
- private static boolean comparable(final Object f, final Object s) {
+ public static boolean comparable(final Object f, final Object s) {
if (f == null || s == null)
return f == s; // true iff both in the null space
+ if (eitherAreNaN(f, s))
+ return false;
+
final Type ft = Type.type(f);
final Type st = Type.type(s);
+ // if objects are collections or composites, their contents must be
mutually comparable
+ if (ft == Type.List && st == Type.List) {
+ return contentsComparable(((List) f).iterator(), ((List)
s).iterator());
+ }
+ else if (ft == Type.Path && st == Type.Path) {
+ return contentsComparable(((Path) f).iterator(), ((Path)
s).iterator());
+ }
+ else if (ft == Type.Set && st == Type.Set) {
+ final List l1 = new ArrayList((Set) f);
+ final List l2 = new ArrayList((Set) s);
+ Collections.sort(l1, ORDERABILITY);
+ Collections.sort(l2, ORDERABILITY);
+
+ return contentsComparable(l1.iterator(), l2.iterator());
+ }
+ else if (ft == Type.Map && st == Type.Map) {
+ final List l1 = new ArrayList(((Map) f).entrySet());
+ final List l2 = new ArrayList(((Map) s).entrySet());
+ Collections.sort(l1, ORDERABILITY);
+ Collections.sort(l2, ORDERABILITY);
+
+ return contentsComparable(l1.iterator(), l2.iterator());
+ }
+ else if (ft == Type.MapEntry && st == Type.MapEntry) {
+ return comparable(((Map.Entry) f).getKey(), ((Map.Entry)
s).getKey()) &&
+ comparable(((Map.Entry) f).getValue(), ((Map.Entry)
s).getValue());
+ }
+ else if (ft == Type.MapEntry && st == Type.MapEntry) {
+ return comparable(((Map.Entry) f).getKey(), ((Map.Entry)
s).getKey()) &&
+ comparable(((Map.Entry) f).getValue(), ((Map.Entry)
s).getValue());
+ }
Review Comment:
```suggestion
```
Looks like a duplicated case of `MapEntry`. Or did you mean to compare a
different type?
> Simplify Comparability Semantics
> --------------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP-3173
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-3173
> Project: TinkerPop
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: process
> Affects Versions: 3.7.3
> Reporter: Cole Greer
> Priority: Major
>
> As recently discussed on the
> [devlist|https://lists.apache.org/thread/hsqw2tvc72dw4z40nnbbdmygrqx43syr],
> our current system of ternary boolean logic should be simplified to binary
> boolean logic where invalid comparisons simply return false.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
