I like the idea of multiple methods with nice names. I'm not averse to a
CloneUtils class (it could be argued that StringUtils is too big as one
class, or that it is most convenient as one class...) Perhaps others can
comment on the location of the new methods.
Stephen
Kevin Gessner wrote:
Kind of what I had in mind, but I'm not sure why serialization would
be the last-attempted method. It's guaranteed to work for any
Serializable without mucking about with reflection, so it should
probably go first. We should also add support for Externalizables (as
rare as they often are). I hacked up some code based on Serialization
cloning, which I could send along.
I don't think this should nec'ly go in with ObjectUtils. Each of the
techniques of cloning would be its own method, with something like a
cloneAll(Object o) that would try each in turn. I think this would
make ObjectUtils messy, and CloneUtils would tie it together nicely.
Kevin
On 6/6/05, Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OK, here is the definition of CloneUtils as originally in my mind:
See PrototypeFactory in [collections].
It clones an object by
a) public method named cloned (called by reflection)
b) public copy constructor
c) serialization
(trying each in turn until one suceeds)
IMHO, this would now be written as ObjectUtils.clone(Object).
(serialization is merely a means to an end, otherwise it would sit with
[io])
Stephen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
