Objects and Serialization

Dear Sir I am new to object serialization. I want to use some graph package of which the classes do not extend from serializable interface, but I need transfer the objects of my classes which have instance of graph class, will I have problem if I only extent serializable in the definition of my

Re: Serialization:)

> > Do Sun have any plans for long term persistence of objects that have been > > serialized? The serialization is a lovely idea, but the incompatibility > > between different Jdk's, and recompiled objects, is a real pain. > > I don't know if this h

XML Serialization

Hi, I had a look at the XML Serialization, it does look quite nice, however the docs dont seem to explain how you make a non swing class, or a class that extends swing, serializable via XML. Does anyone know of a magic url that might shed some light on this? Cheers, J Baker -- John Baker

Re: Fun with serialization

At 07:38 11/30/99 , Michael Sinz wrote: >Also, I know of some problems with older versions of other Java compilers >(such as Jikes) that produce different version IDs from what JavaC does. >(This is a tricky problem - again it should not be an issue as you should >you the same exact class file and

Re: Serialization:)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Do Sun have any plans for long term persistence of objects that have been > serialized? The serialization is a lovely idea, but the incompatibility > between different Jdk's, and recompiled objects, is a real pain. I don't know if this has b

Re: Serialization:)

>Do Sun have any plans for long term persistence of objects that have been >serialized? The serialization is a lovely idea, but the incompatibility >between different Jdk's, and recompiled objects, is a real pain. In theory, the incompatibility isn't that bad. In practice, it

Serialization:)

Do Sun have any plans for long term persistence of objects that have been serialized? The serialization is a lovely idea, but the incompatibility between different Jdk's, and recompiled objects, is a real pain. Oh, thanks for confirming the Linux/Win javax.swing.JEditorPane serial uid f

Re: More fun with serialization:)

>>>>> jbaker writes: jbaker> Back onto serialization. Is the Linux 1.2.2 Jdk compatible jbaker> with the Windows 1.2.2 Jdk? Although it's easy for me to jbaker> make sure both Jdks are using the same set of classes I jbaker> have built, it'

More fun with serialization:)

Hi again, Back onto serialization. Is the Linux 1.2.2 Jdk compatible with the Windows 1.2.2 Jdk? Although it's easy for me to make sure both Jdks are using the same set of classes I have built, it's a little more difficult when I have to use classes such as: javax.swing.JEditorPane (

Re: Fun with serialization

On Tue, 30 Nov 1999 11:22:01 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Hiya, > >After yesterdays fun with getting a Frame Buffer working (thanks for the >advice), Im now having fun with serialization. I am using a Win1.2.2 JVM on >the client end, and the rmi server is using the Blackd

Ref: Subject: Fun with serialization

Oh, sorry to bother you with the Serialization problem. It turned out to be a javac compiled class on the client side, and a jikes compiled class on the server side. I wasn't aware that would cause the class not compatible exception. If only JBuilder would let me use Jikes as the compiler.

Fun with serialization

Hiya, After yesterdays fun with getting a Frame Buffer working (thanks for the advice), Im now having fun with serialization. I am using a Win1.2.2 JVM on the client end, and the rmi server is using the Blackdown1.2.2 or 1.2 (whatever I can get to work:-). When I try to return an object from the

Re: Serialization with Ibm jdk???

quot;. > > My question is: What java SUPPOSED to do with class like this. I haven't seen > it in documentation but I guess it should just ignore static fields. > Do I have to make static fields ALWAYS explicitly TRANSIENT? > > Thanks. No; I would suspect this is a bug i

Re: Serialization with Ibm jdk???

ey> static fields ALWAYS explicitly TRANSIENT? No, the default behavior is to not serialize static fields, see section 1.5 in the Serialization specification: Default serializable fields of a class are defined to be the non-transient and non-static fields. Juergen -

Serialization with Ibm jdk???

Hi, All! I just noticed a little problem: When I tried to serialize class with "private static int xxx" IBM's jdk hung (Blackdown's didn't :) ) It works fine if I make it "private transient static int xxx". My question is: What java SUPPOSED to do with class like this. I haven't seen it in do

Re: Kaffe and Serialization (was Re: Kaffe and HJBrowser)

>Speaking of things that might be "beyond-spec", are Kaffe's standard >classes and the Sun JDK classes Serialization compatible? For example, >if I were to Serialize a java.awt.Panel generated by a Kaffe VM, and >send it over a network to a Sun VM, could the Sun VM dese

Kaffe and Serialization (was Re: Kaffe and HJBrowser)

Peter, Speaking of things that might be "beyond-spec", are Kaffe's standard classes and the Sun JDK classes Serialization compatible? For example, if I were to Serialize a java.awt.Panel generated by a Kaffe VM, and send it over a network to a Sun VM, could the Sun VM deserialize

serialization

I can't seem to get any of my own classes to successfully implement the Serializable interface under Linux or Irix. I have no problem serializing native objects like java.lang.String or java.lang.Integer. Also, serializing my own classes worked fine using the Sun JDK for Windows95. Is this a kn