Serialization

[Rémi Forax]

I am affraid that the only solution is to serialize the bytecode of the 
lambda expression/statement.

Rémi

Joshua Bloch a écrit :
> Mark,
>
> I'm sorry to say, I don't know.  It's a hard problem.  One possibility is to
> provide a concise syntax for named singleton subclasses of functional types.
>  That would finesse the problem rather than solving it.
>
>              Josh
>
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Mark Reinhold <mr at sun.com> wrote:
>
>   
>>> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:17:41 -0800
>>> From: Joshua Bloch <jjb at google.com>
>>>       
>>> This is a moderately important decision. In Google's Java MapReduce API,
>>>       
>> we use
>>     
>>> SAM interfaces to represent Mapper and Reducer. Instances must be
>>>       
>> serializable,
>>     
>>> as they're serialized to pass them from the node that starts the
>>>       
>> MapReduce to
>>     
>>> the worker nodes (which do the actual mapping and reduction). That means
>>>       
>> we
>>     
>>> won't be able to use closure syntax for MapReduce, which seems like a
>>>       
>> shame.
>>     
>>> This is no worse than what we do with SAM types today, but it's no
>>>       
>> better,
>>     
>>> either. Can we do better?
>>>       
>> Maybe.  How would you suggest we address the concerns which Peter raised?
>>
>> - Mark
>>
>>     
>
>