Spark Shen wrote:
I constructed a MockComparator as below:
public static class MockComparator<T> implements Comparator<T> {
public int compare(T o1, T o2) {
if(null == o1) return -1;
if(o1.equals(o2)) {
return 0;
}
return 1;
}
}
This comparator regards null as the smallest object and TreeMap uses
this Comparator as a null-tolerable comparator.
And this comparator is used to test the behavior of TreeMap.headMap()
when the input is null.
Since null is recognized as smallest, the expected length of the
returned SortedMap of TreeMap.headMap(null) will be zero.
My point here is that, under this situation, the MockComparator does
not care about the order of non-null objects, it just know
null is always smaller. So, is it acceptable that - in this
comparator, compare method does not judge the order of all the
non-null objects?
(does not comply with doc of comparator.compare)
What will happen when both o1 and o2 are null?
My understanding about mocked objects is that: we could only implement
some necessary logic, but the logic must be compliant with the
specification. Correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks a lot.
Best regards,
Richard
Best regards
--
Richard Liang
China Software Development Lab, IBM
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
