On Sun, 10 Oct 2021 20:25:43 GMT, Joe Darcy <da...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> The java.io.ObjectInputStream and java.io.ObjectOuputStream classes are part > of the serialization feature. These classes contain brief descriptions of > some of the methods serializable classes can define to interact with the > serialization mechanism, readObject, readObjectNoData, and writeObject. These > descriptions are not entirely consistent with one another and at least one is > arguably misleading. > > This PR makes the brief discussion the same in both classes and addresses the > misleading point: the throws clauses of the methods will not effect whether > or not the methods are found by serialization, but throwing unchecked > exceptions not declared in the standard signatures is ill-advised. (The > current implementation looks up the methods by name using core reflection; > the method modifiers are checked to match but the throws information is not.) > > Please also review the corresponding CSR : > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8275014 src/java.base/share/classes/java/io/ObjectOutputStream.java line 105: > 103: * declared to throw checked exceptions consistent with these > 104: * signatures. > 105: * Why the mix of 'should' vs 'must' in this paragraph? The change above downgrades a 'must' to a 'should'. The original text and the java serialization spec use 'must'. Other JDK doc uses 'should' as being more readable but is supposed to mean 'must'. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/5883
