Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!lust.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!not-for-mail
From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: Did the sort do anything?
Followup-To: comp.lang.java.programmer
Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 09:56:21 +1200
Organization: Geek Central
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <ir6o25$uae$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>
References: <eskis656eeu0of5f5do1ogdpfbdau3d06i@4ax.com> <9303hcFq0nU1@mid.individual.net> <iqgrhp$fh7$1@dont-email.me> <jsgqs61b31jq07e1tmr7d910rfacjeok5r@4ax.com> <iqq2b2$jhm$4@lust.ihug.co.nz> <N6-dnSCv9viQDE3QnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@earthlink.com> <iqqec4$qi7$2@lust.ihug.co.nz> <kemdnZVnBva8n0zQnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <iqr3nv$6t5$2@lust.ihug.co.nz> <noidndppmuNYrEzQnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@earthlink.com> <iqs3tn$pqm$2@lust.ihug.co.nz> <ZOOdndoMvN_sA0zQnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@earthlink.com> <iqt73d$dqg$2@lust.ihug.co.nz> <kYCdnSqcI7kP40_QnZ2dnUVZ_gydnZ2d@earthlink.com> <ir52p0$ups$2@lust.ihug.co.nz> <vaGdna9HCu5lykvQnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <e5CdnR_-upYpwUvQnZ2dnUVZ_uSdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 118-92-95-178.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit
X-Trace: lust.ihug.co.nz 1305928581 31054 118.92.95.178 (20 May 2011 21:56:21 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@ihug.co.nz
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 21:56:21 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: KNode/4.4.7
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:4365

In message <e5CdnR_-upYpwUvQnZ2dnUVZ_uSdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Patricia Shanahan wrote:

> On 5/20/2011 5:00 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>
>> On 5/19/2011 11:46 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> In message<kYCdnSqcI7kP40_QnZ2dnUVZ_gydnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Patricia
>>> Shanahan wrote:
>>>
>>>> Now that we have clarified the fact that System.identityHashCode(x) is
>>>> not merely a synonym for x.hashCode(), have you changed your mind about
>>>> the need, or otherwise, for stability when sorting Java objects based
>>>> on the entire value of the object's fields?
>>>
>>> What do you think I said about “the need, or otherwise, for stability”?
>>
>> "If, on the other hand, you were sorting immutable objects of a Java
>> “reference” type where the key was the entire object state, then
>> stability would indeed be irrelevant, notwithstanding such types are not
>> considered “primitive”."
>>
>> [http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.java.programmer/msg/17e3a8e513ceab46]
> 
> To further refresh your memory, the question I raised was whether you
> consider System.identityHashCode(x) to be part of the "entire object
> state" of the object referenced by x.

What is the significance of sorting on a hash function?