Re: [picocontainer-dev] Bug in DefaultPico?

Mike,

You're quite right - its lame as is.

What do you think it should be changed to ?  One using plain refs  
rather than integers ?

- Paul


On Dec 19, 2007, at 2:18 AM, Michael Rimov wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> I wanted verify that this was actually a problem before I jira'd it.
>
> DefaultPicoContainer has two collections related to storing  
> Lifecycle state:
>
>     /** List collecting the CAs which have been successfully started  
> */
>       private final List<Integer> startedComponentAdapters = new  
> ArrayList<Integer>();
>
>     /**
>      * Keeps track of child containers started status.
>      */
>     private final Set<Integer> childrenStarted = new  
> HashSet<Integer>();
>
> These collections are populated like so:
>
> In Start:
>             childrenStarted.add(child.hashCode());
>
> In Start Adapters:
>
>         adapters = getOrderedComponentAdapters();
>         // clear list of started CAs
>         startedComponentAdapters.clear();
>         // clone the adapters
>         List<ComponentAdapter<?>> adaptersClone = new  
> ArrayList<ComponentAdapter<?>>(adapters);
>         for (final ComponentAdapter<?> adapter : adaptersClone) {
>             if (adapter instanceof Behavior) {
>                 Behavior<?> manager = (Behavior<?>)adapter;
>                 manager.start(DefaultPicoContainer.this);
>                  
> startedComponentAdapters.add(adaptersClone.indexOf(adapter));
>             }
>         }
>
> Now, I have two problems:
>
> 1 – Since hashcodes are not guaranteed unique, it seems that storing  
> a series of integers representing the hashcodes as a substitution  
> for identity is going to cause spurious bugs.
>
> 2 – In start adapters, storing the index seems like unnecessary as  
> well as awfully dependent on the immutability of the adapters.
>
> Overall it seems that relying on collections of integers in this  
> fashion is only asking for trouble, and since the collections are  
> only storing references, I don’t even see that it has a significant  
> savings in memory.
>
> Can someone set me straight on this?
>
> Thanks,
>
>                                                 -Mike
>
>
>
>