While the development team has exploded for [MATH], maintaining Serializable
interfaces is expensive and historically hasn't been kept up. So I would go
for requiring the user to do something like:
public class MyPolynomialSplineFunction extends PolynomialSplineFunction,
implements Serializable {
private static long serialVersionUID = <something>;
// put non-default constructors here
}
it is less than a minute to do this in eclipse, so it should be on the user
for classes like this.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gilles Sadowski
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 11:40 AM
To: dev@commons.apache.org
Subject: [Math] Make everything "Serializable" ?
Hi.
This is an issue raised in relation to this JIRA ticket:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-742
My position is that there should not be a discussion each time someone wants
a class to be "Serializable". Ideally, the rule should be clear enough that
the developer of a new class knows whether it should be made "Serializable"
or not.
Either we decide to not get in the way, ever, by making everything
"Serializable", or we think that some classes should be "Serializable" and
others should not, for some reason. [And IMHO that reason should be more
substantial than someone opening a ticket saying "Please make this class
Serializable because I need it".]
However, because the second alternative is likely to generate exhausting
debates not worth the energy, I shall stop even trying to defend this
point-of-view. ;)
Best regards,
Gilles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
