From: Roedy Green on
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 21:39:22 -0700 (PDT), Arthi J <arthi.j(a)gmail.com>
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

>public int compareTo(Object o) {
>return 1;

this is a dummy compareTo. It is just a placeholder until the proper
code is inserted.

see http://mindprod.com/jgloss/compareable.html
--
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
http://mindprod.com

There is no harm in being sometimes wrong especially if one is promptly found out.
~ John Maynard Keynes (born: 1883-06-05 died: 1946-04-21 at age: 62)
From: Christian Kaufhold on
Roedy Green <see_website(a)mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:

> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 21:39:22 -0700 (PDT), Arthi J <arthi.j(a)gmail.com>
> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>public int compareTo(Object o) {
>>return 1;
>
> this is a dummy compareTo. It is just a placeholder until the proper
> code is inserted.

Then it should use
return 0;
as that is at least a consistent implementation (only one equivalence class).
From: Eric Sosman on
On 7/13/2010 3:33 PM, Christian Kaufhold wrote:
> Roedy Green<see_website(a)mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 21:39:22 -0700 (PDT), Arthi J<arthi.j(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>>
>>> public int compareTo(Object o) {
>>> return 1;
>>
>> this is a dummy compareTo. It is just a placeholder until the proper
>> code is inserted.
>
> Then it should use
> return 0;
> as that is at least a consistent implementation (only one equivalence class).

Still better, IMHO, is

public int compareTo(Object o) {
throw new UnsupportedOperationException("FIX ME!");
}

(This is approximately what NetBeans generates for you when you tell
it to implement the missing methods required by an interface or by
an abstract superclass.)

--
Eric Sosman
esosman(a)ieee-dot-org.invalid