+1 The amount of code in the wild that would break (if this were to change) virtually guarantees that such a change won't happen, regardless of what current spec does or does not say. It would probably be easier to just update the spec at this point to match implementation.
Vitaly Sent from my phone On Nov 15, 2013 7:57 AM, "Stephen Colebourne" <scolebou...@joda.org> wrote: > On 15 November 2013 03:21, Joseph Darcy <joe.da...@oracle.com> wrote: > > Catching up on email, the specification of java.lang.Class does not > > explicitly promise that its notion of equality must be identity for all > > time. Therefore, while not required for today's implementations, I would > > prefer that new code we write in the JDK use equals rather than == when > > comparing classes. > > I've used == for Class for many years. I expect many other developers > have done the same. I think that changing Class so identity was not > respected would break a *lot* of code. > > Stephen >
