DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31091>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31091 [collections] Collection inside Abstract[AnyCollection]Decorator really needed to be transient? [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WORKSFORME Summary|Collection inside |[collections] Collection |Abstract[AnyCollection]Decor|inside |ator really needed to be |Abstract[AnyCollection]Decor |transient? |ator really needed to be | |transient? ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-07 21:01 ------- The transient tag is merely a marker to emphasise that the field will not be serialized automatically. Since the Abstract*Decorator classes do not implement the Serializable interface themselves, the transient marker actually has no effect. Each subclass that IS serializable must manually store the map field using readObject/writeObject methods, as per the serialization spec. The reason behind all of this is to maintain backwards compatability of Abstract*Decorator from v3.1 to v3.0, by not forcing all decorators to be serializable. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
