[cdi-dev] Fw: [weld-dev] Overly restrictive serialization requirements

Mark Struberg struberg at yahoo.de
Tue May 24 04:47:05 EDT 2011

Hi David!

I'm forwarding this to the CID-EG list (weld-dev is only for JBoss Weld now).


--- On Tue, 5/24/11, David Blevins <david.blevins at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: David Blevins <david.blevins at gmail.com>
> Subject: [weld-dev] Overly restrictive serialization requirements
> To: weld-dev at lists.jboss.org
> Date: Tuesday, May 24, 2011, 4:18 AM
> I find CDI 1.0 section 6.6.4 and some
> of the TCK tests a little confusing.  I know
> serialization like the back of my hand and much of that
> section does not line up with actual serialization
> requirements.
> The bottom line is that you can't statically check a
> class's serialization capabilities.  Non-serializable
> object reference types are ok.  Fields of
> java.lang.Object and other non-serialzable types are
> ok.  The reference type does not need to be
> serializable, just the object at the other end of the
> reference needs to be serializable.  Obviously you
> can't check that at deploy time, you need the
> instance.  You can't even check it at runtime as there
> are callbacks in the Serialization API that allow the
> instance to control it's own serialization.  If the
> class implements Serializable you just have to trust it will
> be when the time comes.
> Small example:  https://gist.github.com/988120
> What's the point of mistrusting a class that claims to be
> serializable and adding CDI-specific restrictions on its
> fields, methods and constructor types?
> -David
> _______________________________________________
> weld-dev mailing list
> weld-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev

More information about the cdi-dev mailing list