Features/use comparator #67
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Great job! This looks very good. I'll merge it right away! |
SQiShER
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 6, 2013
New feature to allow equality check by using the compareTo method of comparable types. Thanks to Jean-Eudes
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi,
The comparaison between BigDecimal with the equals method is different of comparaison with compareTo method. The equals method compare the value and the scale. For example, with BigDecimal, 1 is not equal to 1.0. This problem must be resolve using the compareTo method.
In this pull request, we add configuration and annotation to specify if an object must be comparing with equals or with compareTo method. We update the code to use compareTo instead of equals for BigDecimal.
Jean-Eudes