• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Implementing isEqual: and hash
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Implementing isEqual: and hash


  • Subject: Re: Implementing isEqual: and hash
  • From: Jeff Johnson <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 12:26:48 -0500

On Aug 23, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote:

On Aug 23, 2008, at 5:13 AM, Michael Ash wrote:

On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 7:41 AM, Graham Cox <email@hidden> wrote:
I have a class for which equality can be defined as having the same internal
string value (which happens to be a UUID-turned-string). I can easily
implement isEqual: based on that but the docs say I also need to implement
-hash. Any pointers on what is a good way to do that? Could I just safely
defer to the -hash returned by the string in question?

The implementation of -hash should *always* match the implementation of -isEqual:.

And as Jim alluded, -hash must not depend on mutable properties; if the hash changes while the object is in a hashing collection, you'll end up with random crashes.

Right. Thus, it's a bad idea to use mutable properties in isEqual:. If you find yourself tempted to do that, impement an isEqualToMyClass: method rather than isEqual:.


If you compare primitives in -isEqual:, you should combine them (using
xor or the like) in -hash. If you compare objects by calling - isEqual:
on them, you should combine their hashes (using xor or the like). If
you do some of each, combine them all.

What's the motivation for combining hashes in this case? I've wondered what is the best thing to do when isEqual: is based on comparing multiple ivars; I typically just use one of them for the hash.

It's a documented requirement of the isEqual: and hash methods that the hash must be the same when isEqual: returns YES. Thus, whatever logic that returns YES in isEqual: must have some kind of match in hash.


-Jeff

_______________________________________________

Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)

Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com

Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Implementing isEqual: and hash
      • From: "Adam R. Maxwell" <email@hidden>
    • Re: Implementing isEqual: and hash
      • From: Jeff Johnson <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Implementing isEqual: and hash (From: Graham Cox <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Implementing isEqual: and hash (From: "Michael Ash" <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Implementing isEqual: and hash (From: "Adam R. Maxwell" <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: NSApplication _doOpenUntitled raises exception under Leopard, not Tiger
  • Next by Date: Re: Implementing isEqual: and hash
  • Previous by thread: Re: Implementing isEqual: and hash
  • Next by thread: Re: Implementing isEqual: and hash
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread