On Jan 27, 2011, at 10:41 PM, Ben Mabey wrote: > On 1/27/11 7:24 PM, Ken Wesson wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Mark Engelberg >> <mark.engelb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Records don't have serialization yet, do they? >> user=> (defrecord Foo [n]) >> user.Foo >> user=> ((supers Foo) java.io.Serializable) >> java.io.Serializable >> >> Looks like they do. > > I've been serializing/serializing records in my current project quite a bit. > The one caveat is that for java to serialize the record a class file needs to > be compiled for the record. In my case that just meant I had to introduce > AOT via leiningen (which does complicate things TBH). > > While this serialization has been fine for most of my needs I have quite > often wanted to be able to use *print-dup* since binary serialization seemed > overkill in those cases. Hopefully something like defrecord2 gets added to > clojure at some point to make dealing with records more pleasant.
I don't think it's obvious whether any particular serialization mechanism is generally better or worse than another without knowing details about a particular context. *print-dup*'s (and others') generally human-readable representations and dynamic nature are definitely nice and helpful in some cases; binary serialization mechanisms – including java.io.Serialization – that are generally static will usually be a few orders of magnitude faster. The above is FWIW. I just wanted to offer something tangible in response to "overkill". :-) - Chas -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
