On 17 May 2016, at 09:55, Stephen Colebourne <scolebou...@joda.org> wrote:
> CollSer should not be public, especially not just for serialization > reasons. Right, and I see no reason to refer to it by name in the javadoc, the link should be sufficient. > Stuart, I disagree with using an int for the flags, it should be a byte. If > you need future expansion you can use 0xff to indicate it with the parser > reacting accordingly. That is the strategy for JSR 310 The JSR 310 Serialization framework is a little more involved, as you know. I wonder if it is worth following that pattern more closely here? That way java.util.Ser could be a generic proxy for all new Serializable types in the java.util package, and not just the immutable collections. The 310 pattern also results in a reasonable place to document the serial form. -Chris. > Stephen > On 17 May 2016 8:29 a.m., "Peter Levart" <peter.lev...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Stuart, > > > > On 05/17/2016 12:48 AM, Stuart Marks wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Please review this changeset that adds specifications of the serialized >> forms (really, a single serialization proxy class) for the immutable >> collections implementation. There are no code changes in this changeset, >> just documentation. >> >> It's somewhat odd, but the class doc for the serialization proxy isn't >> actually included in the serialized-form.html output. I had to jigger >> around the method doc for readResolve() to include some general information >> about the class. >> >> I also added links manually from the List, Map, and Set interfaces to the >> serialized form and vice-versa. I'm not aware of another way for a private >> class to link to its (proxied) serialized form. >> >> I was able to coerce specdiff into giving a diff of serialized-form.html. >> It's not very convenient, though; like serialized-form.html, the html diff >> is one big file. The only difference is the addition of java.util.CollSer. >> >> Webrev: >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smarks/reviews/8133977/webrev.0/ >> >> API specdiff: >> >> >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smarks/reviews/8133977/specdiff.0/api.specdiff/overview-summary.html >> >> serialized-form.html diff: >> >> >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smarks/reviews/8133977/specdiff.0/serial.specdiff/specdiff-summary.html >> >> Thanks, >> >> s'marks >> > > Perhaps java.util.CollSer could be promoted to be a public class. It does, > after all, specify the API (serialization form == API). I don't see a point > in hiding it and then jiggering around the method doc for readResolve()... > You could just restrict its use by keeping the constructor(s) > package-private... > > What do you think? > > Regards, Peter
