Serialization stability

Brian Goetz brian.goetz at
Mon Oct 8 10:26:57 PDT 2012

> I disagree - anonymous classes were an oversight; just because one thing
> doesn't work does not give justification to make more problems.  It's
> more of an excuse.  I think we *can* limit serialization to named
> references, and this would cause a better user experience

No, the user experience in this case would be terrible!  People would 
simply not understand why the "stupid compiler" is forcing you to 
manually desugar lambdas to method references, why static and unbound 
method refs are OK but not bound ones, or why simple lambdas like s -> 
true will not serialize, or why things that are expressible today as 
serializable anonymous classes don't work as lambdas.

(I am not saying that your position is not one worth discussing, just 
that to call it a better user experience is kind of silly.)

More information about the lambda-spec-experts mailing list