Re: persistence/serializable

Kludge Option: I don't advocate this approach; but just anoter idea to
get you thinking

Try marking the Arraylist as [XmlIgnore]
then adding another public property that contains a list of strings.

in the Get  build the list of strings from the array list;
in the set build the list of arrayobjects from disk; ONLY if the
arraylist is null


Dave

On 3/27/07, Nassar, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote:
> Does anyone know how a way to do this w/o having Component implement
> IXmlSerializable? Since nearly every member of that class that you want
> to serialize has an acceptable default XML serialization, it shouldn't
> be too hard. The only alternative that comes to mind is to use a custom
> collection, and *not* ArrayList; then implement IXmlSerializable for
> that class (i.e., just write out the names of the Step objects, and just
> read those back in. Then the enclosing instance of Component would have
> to resolve those references, though, which takes you back to
> implementing IXmlSerializable for Component).
>
> This is why I don't like to make classes serializable. Usually I've got
> a "memento" class that the real class can instantiate, or populate
> itself from. I design the memento in order to be trivially serializable.
>
> ===================================
> This list is hosted by DevelopMentor(r)  http://www.develop.com
>
> View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com
>


--
Dave Jones
[email protected]
[email protected]

b1xml2 : "The one thing that is differentiates VB.NET from C# is the
horrible ability to do this turn Option explicit and strict off, after
which VB.NET can resemble mangled spaghetti. "

===================================
This list is hosted by DevelopMentor®  http://www.develop.com

View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com