I don't think you need to do that though. I'm pretty sure if you subclass a class that isn't serializeable and make the subclass implement serializeable, the serialization should succeed.
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:40:02 -0600, Jonathan Eric Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually, I guess maybe I just don't understand how Serializable works. I > think the reason why the following didn't work is that it only serialized > the immediate class and not the parent classes. > > I copied javax.faces.model.ListDataModel to my own file and then modified it > by only adding "implements Serializable" and now it seems to work. > > Jon > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jonathan Eric Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "MyFaces Discussion" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 3:57 PM > Subject: Re: Fw: DataModels not Serializable? > > >I tried doing something like this, but, it doesn't seem to work. When I > >undeploy and redeploy my Web application, it appears that the list is > >disappearing (I have a h:dataTable bound to a data model and the table size > >goes to 0). The rest of my bean's state (i.e. simple properties) seem to be > >OK... > > > > package mypackage.faces.model; > > import java.io.Serializable; > > import java.util.List; > > public class ListDataModel extends javax.faces.model.ListDataModel > > implements Serializable { > > public ListDataModel() { > > super(); > > } > > public ListDataModel(List list) { > > super(list); > > } > > } > > > > Jon > > -- -Heath Borders-Wing [EMAIL PROTECTED]
