On 24 Nov 2015, at 23:27, Stuart Marks <stuart.ma...@oracle.com> wrote: > …. > > But in the hypothetical value-typed future, we might want to return value > types from at least some of the factory methods. Value types have no notion > of identity, so we don't want to make any statements that lead to thinking > about the identity of the returned object, even to the extent of saying that > it "might" be the "same" instance as one previously returned. > > Based on this, it occurs to me that I should add the "value-based" disclaimer > to the relevant section of class doc. (I also note that, off-line, John Rose > had already prompted me to do this, so I should heed his advice.)
Is there any impact on the Serializability of these collections, if they are “value” based? I don’t think so, but I’m not sure, since their serial form is not documented. Note to self: should we document their serial form? > I'll also change the method docs to say something like, > > * Returns an immutable list containing <N> elements. > * ... > * @return a list containing the specified elements Looks fine. -Chris.
