forbidding serialization methods as members of records
Vicente Romero
vicente.romero at oracle.com
Thu Oct 31 12:51:04 UTC 2019
On 10/31/19 8:33 AM, Remi Forax wrote:
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *De: *"Chris Hegarty" <chris.hegarty at oracle.com>
> *À: *"Vicente Romero" <vicente.romero at oracle.com>
> *Cc: *"amber-spec-experts" <amber-spec-experts at openjdk.java.net>
> *Envoyé: *Jeudi 31 Octobre 2019 13:25:53
> *Objet: *Re: forbidding serialization methods as members of records
>
>
>
> On 31 Oct 2019, at 12:21, Vicente Romero
> <vicente.romero at oracle.com <mailto:vicente.romero at oracle.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In the past we discussed about forbidding the declaration of
> some serialization related methods in records. In particular:
>
> writeObject(ObjectOutputStream)
> readObjectNoData()
> readObject(ObjectInputStream)
>
> I wonder if we still want to enforce that restriction, meaning
> that it should be reflected in the spec, or if it is not
> necessary anymore,
>
>
> Where we ended up with Serializable Records, is that the runtime
> is specified to ignore these methods if they appear in a
> serializable record ( there are tests that assert this ). The
> javac restriction is no longer strictly necessary, but of course
> catches effectively-useless declarations early, and without
> resorting checkers, inspection, etc.
>
>
> It is necessary from a user point of view to have a javac error,
> having something that silently fails is the worst in term of user
> experience.
would a warning be an option?
>
>
> -Chris.
>
>
> Rémi
>
Vicente
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/amber-spec-experts/attachments/20191031/8471ab63/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the amber-spec-experts
mailing list