Received: by 10.66.74.102 with SMTP id s6mr2370210pav.21.1346187493826; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 13:58:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.244.73 with SMTP id xe9mr2122047pbc.10.1346187493811; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 13:58:13 -0700 (PDT)
Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!4no23665416pbn.1!news-out.google.com!t10ni106882016pbh.0!nntp.google.com!4no23665415pbn.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 13:58:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <k1hgt4$vk5$1@dont-email.me>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=69.28.149.29; posting-account=CP-lKQoAAAAGtB5diOuGlDQk0jIwmH0T
NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.28.149.29
References: <563f186a-edb3-4311-ae48-3af7decfce2c@googlegroups.com> <k03d6p$2bt$1@dont-email.me> <6ac6c252-c370-4f74-b29d-ce5368019977@googlegroups.com> <502598d0$0$287$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <a8pv38F9ouU1@mid.individual.net> <5028191b$0$290$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <a8sr5sFropU1@mid.individual.net> <50317b03$0$281$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <slrnk36phl.u9l.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> <503bfd0f$0$282$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <CNT_r.5387$pd4.3890@newsfe21.iad> <k1h1sp$qdf$1@dont-email.me> <PPadnUGBC8NIuKHNnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@earthlink.com> <k1hgt4$vk5$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <3cc7cc45-ae25-4d4e-936b-85dde7a17079@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: hashCode
From: Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 20:58:13 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:18361

markspace wrote:
> Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>> markspace wrote:
>> ...
>>> For example, in C, one can always hash based on memory address.  In Java
>>> we don't have that option, so hashcode() takes the place of the
>>> intrinsic property of an address.
>> ...
> 
>> In Java we have System.identityHashCode() which provides an address-like
>> hash code for any object.
> 
> I think System.identityHashCode() is the (same as the) default 
> implementation for Object::hashCode(), yes?

Why wonder when it's in the Javadocs?

Hm?

It is, in fact, required to be.

> So there's a small bit of evidence in support of the idea that 
> Object::hashCode() is meant to mimic the idea of just hashing on address.