On 02/11/2012 06:46 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
[I still have to understand why objects that represent mathematical algorithms must be serializable. It is quite possible that I miss somehing but a use-case would help. In principle, I'd think that we must provide accessors that would enable user code to re-construct any CM object; then it's up to the user code to create any "Serializable" object for storing those data they want to send over the wire, and reconstruct the CM object on the other end...]
I think you have a good point in general, but the case where this discussion started is not as clear-cut as this. In fact, many algorithms in CM are a mixture of data structures and algorithms bound together using OO paradigms, which may not be always the best solution.
So my conclusion would be to work on improving the code to be more functional and separate algorithms / data. In the mean time we can support the users by making their lives easier and support serialization by default where possible. If somebody has to work on a use-case that requires more sophisticated methods, well, he/she will have to find a solution anyway.
Thomas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
