[weld-dev] AnnotationLiteral

[Pete Muir]

On 8 Nov 2009, at 13:21, Pete Muir wrote:

> 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.

BTW this is the generally recommended approach for APIs.

>
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> weld-dev mailing list
> weld-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev