OK, an optional interface with one method getSortComparator() that can 

be implemented by the inspected object could be a practicable solution. 

Adds another interface though.



Christian



On 18.03.2016 16:56, Sean Luke wrote:

> On Mar 18, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Christian Meyer

> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>

>> Hmm, for me the property order is not how I put the accessors into

>> my source code. This seems to differ between JVMs.

>

> Well, the order certainly is left unspecified in the documentation.

> But almost all JVMs assume the order is the same as the order

> specified in the class file (by javac -- why wouldn't they?), *and*

> most (or all?) javac implementations put them in the order they're

> parsed from the file.  So I think that a great many people have

> generally relied on this for their models.  Certainly when I started

> alphabetizing, I got a bit of an outcry.

>

> It was for this reason that I thought maybe we should them unordered

> by default, but make it easy to dictate an order, perhaps via a

> method in the objects themselves?

>

> Sean

>