[weld-dev] AnnotationLiteral

[Pete Muir]

Gavin, I wonder if we should actually have AnnotationLiteral and  
TypeLiteral actually implement Serializable as this places a burden on  
all subclasses, that they *must* be serializable (clearly this is not  
enforced, but it is correct, and the error messages users get will be  
a lot worse).

Rather I wonder if *Literal should support subclasses which wish to  
implement Serializable. To do this we would just indicate this is the  
case in the javadoc and remove Serializable.

WDYT?

On 8 Nov 2009, at 09:31, Gavin King wrote:

> Well, I couldn't sleep, so I fixed it.
>
> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 3:33 AM, Gavin King <gavin.king at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>> So I've made some improvements to TypeLiteral and AnnotationLiteral,
>> including making them serializable.
>>
>> I need to get some sleep now, but at the last minute I noticed that
>> AnnotationLiteral is pretty broken for primitive array valued  
>> members.
>> You can't do Object[].class.cast() on primitive arrays.
>>
>> We need to fix that before release.
>>
>> --
>> Gavin King
>> gavin.king at gmail.com
>> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
>> http://hibernate.org
>> http://seamframework.org
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Gavin King
> gavin.king at gmail.com
> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> http://hibernate.org
> http://seamframework.org
> _______________________________________________
> weld-dev mailing list
> weld-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev