Hmmm... where are you seeing this "large retrofit"? The confusion over equals VS equalsTopo is indeed a thing in the Java world, and equalsTopo was created to encourage being unambiguous about the intended meaning. But in JTS equals just delegates to equalsTopo, and equals is still used all over the place in JTS code (equalsTopo - not so much).
Actually equals is not used at all in the core code (since it's highly inefficient for low-level use). It's used in the unit tests, where performance doesn't matter as much. But even there it's mostly only used either where it is being tested, or in a somewhat casual way that should probably be replaced. So before opining about which way GEOS should go need to know more about where it's being used. On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 1:42 PM Paul Ramsey <pram...@cleverelephant.ca> wrote: > Hrm... so, it seems at some point there was a large retrofit to flip > equals() to equalsTopo(). I assume that's because (if I recall right) > equals() has some special meaning/uses in the Java world, and having it > with a different meaning made some things (maps, I think?) not work. > > GEOS never made that flip, not having the same problem. On the one hand, > making the flip would potentially make future porting simpler (method names > would line up). On the other hand, it could be an error-prone and labour > intensive process... what's your feeling? > > P > _______________________________________________ > geos-devel mailing list > geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
_______________________________________________ geos-devel mailing list geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
