Re: java serialization alternative

Btw, There is one oddity about the rules that IMO mostly goes back to
pedanticism on the part of the people who designed them

You can remove a primitive field
You can add a primitive field
But you cannot change the type of a primitive field directly, even
though this is logically equivalent to a remove followed  by an add.


Attila Szegedi wrote:
> On 2008.03.29., at 19:01, Bob Lee wrote:
>> (I would argue
>> that reliably maintaining compatibility is almost impossible with
>> serialization without a robust test suite which easily counteracts the
>> simplicity of serialization).
>
> Interesting statement - care to elaborate? I've found that evolving
> the class design is easy with serialization but then, I've been mostly
> adding fields and paid attention that the default value of the field
> is okay for existing serialized object representations. On a single
> object level, it is basically an object-to-(name-value-pair) codec.
> What pitfalls specifically do you have in mind?
>
> Attila.
>
>>
>>
>> Bob
>
> ===================================
> This list is hosted by DevelopMentor®  http://www.develop.com
>
> View archives and manage your subscription(s) at
> http://discuss.develop.com

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

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