I don't think so, as I believe that is how it's supposed to work. From the docs (http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/doc/1.6/ DevGuideServerCommunication.html#DevGuideSerializableTypes):
A type is serializable and can be used in a service interface if one of the following is true: The type is primitive, such as char, byte, short, int, long, boolean, float, or double. The type an instance of the String, Date, or a primitive wrapper such as Character, Byte, Short, Integer, Long, Boolean, Float, or Double. The type is an enumeration. Enumeration constants are serialized as a name only; none of the field values are serialized. The type is an array of serializable types (including other serializable arrays). The type is a serializable user-defined class. The type has at least one serializable subclass. ... and ... A user-defined class is serializable if all of the following apply: 1. It is assignable to IsSerializable or Serializable, either because it directly implements one of these interfaces or because it derives from a superclass that does 2. All non-final, non-transient instance fields are themselves serializable, and 3. Prior to GWT 1.5, it must have a public default (zero argument) constructor or no constructor at all. 4. As of GWT 1.5, it must have a default (zero argument) constructor (with any access modifier) or no constructor at all. On Jul 21, 1:56 pm, Juraj Vitko <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah I've left that out in the example, it of course is marked with > IsSerializable. > > However! - I've found a solution (just needed to recall that I've had > similar problem with Interfaces+Classes already): > > A Class (or Enum) type extending the said "non-serializable" interface > (MyIface in the above example) needs to be defined in the same package > as the interface. The compiler warning is then not produced. > > I've scanned GWT-Issues (and GWT docs) for this, haven't exactly found > it - should I fill this as an Issue? > > On Jul 21, 9:49 pm, Nuno <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Don't you also need to do: > > > class POJO extends Serializable ? > > > I got many alerts about this in my classes. > > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Juraj Vitko <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I'm trying to RPC-send an interface member in a POJO - all types > > > implementing this interface are Enums (see the example below please). > > > > Now, the application works 100% in both hosted and web modes, but the > > > Java to JavaScript compiler complains about the POJO object, that the > > > MyIFace is not RPC-serializable. ("was not serializable and has no > > > concrete serializable subtypes") > > > > Any ideas how to get rid of that compiler warning? I'm using GWT 1.6 > > > for the time being. > > > > class POJO { //this object is sent via the RPC > > > MyIface iface; > > > } > > > > interface MyIface extends IsSerializable { > > > MyIface[] getVals(String param); > > > } > > > > enum MyEnum implements MyIface { > > > one("1"), > > > two("2"); > > > > private MyEnum(String s) { this.s = s; } > > > private MyEnum() { } > > > > private String s; > > > > MyIface[] getVals(String param) { > > > return MyEnum.values(); > > > } > > > } > > > -- > > Quer aprender a programar? acompanhe: > > Wants to learn GWT? Follow this blog -> > > >http://tcninja.blogspot.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
