Posted issue http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=4805.
As for equals, why not just compare the double values directly, vs bitwise equality? Unless you're concerned with the various versions of NaN and infinity this should work fine; in fact you might even want to allow a bit of a margin to deal with rounding. jchimene, you'd want to do something like the original poster to avoid that, 31*hashOfpX + hashOfpY. On Mar 31, 11:46 am, kozura <[email protected]> wrote: > Ach, you're right, I hadn't bothered to check in deployed mode, > assumed GWT did the right thing! This should be posted as an issue, > as hashCode() is listed as implemented, but it should be done > correctly. So I guess toString is the best way to go in the > meantime.. > > On Mar 31, 10:34 am, Thomas Broyer <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Mar 31, 5:30 pm, kozura <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > ((Double)fX).hashCode() seems to work fine. > > > It's no more than a "return (int) value" (i.e. equivalent to "(int) > > fX") which is probably not "accurate" enough for a Point where you > > chose to use doubles to store the coordinates... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
