On Mon, 17 Jul 2023 11:02:46 GMT, Daniel Jeliński <djelin...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> You think it was a typo (+ instead of *) in the original code?
>
> The original code calculated `(37 **
> nameValue.length)*(37+oid.hashCode)+Arrays.hashCode`; since you already
> dropped the multiplication, you can also drop the addition.
Thanks for noticing this difference!
Yes, the initial value would've been exponentiated (^ or ** in your notation).
However, I note that the original code computed this:
if nameValue.length > 0
(37^nameValue.length) * oid.hashCode() + 37 + Arrays.hashCode(nameValue)
otherwise
37 + oid.hashCode()
Well, it would've computed that, had the multiplier constant been 37 in
Arrays.hashCode, which it is not; it's 31.
Since we cannot achieve absolute fidelity with the old code, I suggest we do
this instead, what do you think?
public int hashCode() {
if (myhash == -1) {
myhash = Arrays.deepHashCode(new Object[]{oid, nameValue});
}
return myhash;
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14738#discussion_r1265276585
