> when the gc next moves the object, it adds an extra field in which the original address is cached. Under this scheme, if I allocate object A at address 0, th

> when the gc next moves the object, it adds an extra field in which the original address is cached. Under this scheme, if I allocate object A at address 0, then GC-move it to address 100 (such that it caches that it was "originally at" address 0); and then, with object A still alive, I allocate object B at address 0... then don't objects A and B both now have 0 as their identity hashcode? (I'm guessing the answer here is "this only works with generational GC, and the GC generation sequence-number is an implicit part of the stateless-address hashcodes and an explicit part of the cached-in-member hashcodes")