BshMethod equality succeeds for subtypes, does not support hashcode contract

[GoogleCodeExporter]

BshMethod.equals() succeeds when comparing subclasses with BshMethod instances:

{{{
   @SuppressWarnings("serial")
   @Test
   public void testEqualsObject_subclassEquality() {
      // define a simple subclass of BshMethod:
      class SubMethod extends BshMethod {
         public SubMethod(String name, Class returnType, String[] paramNames,
               Class[] paramTypes, BSHBlock methodBody,
               NameSpace declaringNameSpace, Modifiers modifiers) {
            super(name, returnType, paramNames, paramTypes, methodBody,
declaringNameSpace,
                  modifiers);
         }
      };

      final String name = "testMethod";
      final BshMethod subInst = new SubMethod(name, 
            Integer.class, new String[]{}, new Class[]{}, null, null, null);
      final BshMethod supInst = new BshMethod(name, 
            Integer.class, new String[]{}, new Class[]{}, null, null, null);

      Assert.assertFalse("Subclasses should not be equal to super classes",
            supInst.equals(subInst));
   }
}}}

This method also does not support the hashcode/equals contract:

{{{
   @Test
   public void testHashCode_contract() {
      final String name = "testMethod";
      final BshMethod method1 = new BshMethod(name, 
            Integer.class, new String[]{}, new Class[]{}, null, null, null);
      final BshMethod method2 = new BshMethod(name, 
            Integer.class, new String[]{}, new Class[]{}, null, null, null);

      Assert.assertTrue("precondition check for test failed.", 
            method2.equals(method1));
      Assert.assertEquals("Equal classes should have equal hashcodes",
            method2.hashCode(), method1.hashCode());
   }
}}}

This is a fairly easy fix, as long as it is not intentional.  I'll try and
attach a patch tonight / tomorrow.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by cresw...@gmail.com on 1 Mar 2009 at 12:30

[GoogleCodeExporter]

These tests are now in svn, see revision r35.  They are ignored, however, since 
they
are known to fail.

I'll check in the fixes to BshMethod as soon as I find time to hack out 
`hashCode()`

Original comment by cresw...@gmail.com on 4 Mar 2009 at 3:36

• Changed state: Started

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Since nothing happend since March 2009 i changed the owner to me.

As far as i can see this defect causes no harm but should be easy to fix

Original comment by pejob...@gmail.com on 21 Feb 2011 at 11:44

[GoogleCodeExporter]

This issue was closed by revision r43.

Original comment by `` on 21 Feb 2011 at 11:59

• Changed state: Fixed

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by pejob...@gmail.com on 25 Feb 2011 at 5:56

• Added labels: milestone-2.1b0

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by pejob...@gmail.com on 20 Oct 2011 at 7:12

• Added labels: v2.1