* Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> [2008-04-05 11:44:39]:
> On Saturday 05 April 2008 03:34, Florent Daigni?re wrote: > > * Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> [2008-04-04 19:09:01]: > > > > > On Friday 04 April 2008 06:20, nextgens at freenetproject.org wrote: > > > > Author: nextgens > > > > Date: 2008-04-04 05:20:31 +0000 (Fri, 04 Apr 2008) > > > > New Revision: 18966 > > > > > > > > Modified: > > > > trunk/freenet/src/freenet/crypt/SHA1.java > > > > trunk/freenet/src/freenet/support/DoublyLinkedListImpl.java > > > > trunk/freenet/src/freenet/support/math/DecayingKeyspaceAverage.java > > > > trunk/freenet/src/freenet/support/math/RunningAverage.java > > > > > trunk/freenet/src/freenet/support/math/SimpleBinaryRunningAverage.java > > > > Log: > > > > implement Cloneable where we have a clone() method > > > > > > Why? > > > > > > public interface Cloneable > > > > > > A class implements the Cloneable interface to indicate to the > Object.clone() > > > method that it is legal for that method to make a field-for-field copy of > > > instances of that class. > > > > > > Invoking Object's clone method on an instance that does not implement the > > > Cloneable interface results in the exception CloneNotSupportedException > being > > > thrown. > > > > > > By convention, classes that implement this interface should override > > > Object.clone (which is protected) with a public method. See > > > Object.clone() > > > for details on overriding this method. > > > > > > Note that this interface does not contain the clone method. Therefore, it > is > > > not possible to clone an object merely by virtue of the fact that it > > > implements this interface. Even if the clone method is invoked > reflectively, > > > there is no guarantee that it will succeed. > > > > > > > Okay, it's a bad idea in SHA1.java; I meant to do it in JavaSHA1.java > > (r18972) and forgot to revert that bit afterwards... > > > > Fixed in r18998 > > > > I think that the patch is revelant for other classes. > > I don't. Cloneable does not even contain a public clone(). Its ONLY purpose > is > to indicate to the JVM that it can do a field for field copy. Ok, reverted in r19052 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20080406/0e2b7f9a/attachment.pgp>
