←back to thread

JEP draft: Prepare to make final mean final

(openjdk.org)
204 points mfiguiere | 2 comments | 31 Mar 25 19:35 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
exabrial ◴[31 Mar 25 21:56 UTC] No.43540415[source]▶
I'm 100% onboard with this. My thought was how are they going to make Serialization work, but looks like they thought of that.

I was trying to think of an edge case with JsonB or JAXB that would be affected by this... but generally those frameworks have told you for quite awhile not to do stupid stuff like:

``` @Getter public class HelloMessage { @JsonbProperty private final String helloMessage; } ```

I can't think of any frameworks offhand that do this.

replies(1): >>43540656 #
hyperpape ◴[31 Mar 25 22:29 UTC] No.43540656[source]▶
Brian Goetz, chief architect of Java, once posted a "what they think I do" vs. "what I actually" do tweet. If I remember correctly, 25% - 50% of the "what I actually do" category was something like "get angry at serialization."

So I think it's safe to say "what about serialization?" is always going to be asked.

replies(2): >>43541016 #>>43542398 #
1. exabrial ◴[31 Mar 25 23:14 UTC] No.43541016[source]▶
Serialization is unfortunately important though... want to suspend a program and resume it later, or transfer it over a network, etc. The real world is kinda a let down.
replies(1): >>43541944 #
2. esprehn ◴[01 Apr 25 01:35 UTC] No.43541944[source]▶
That's a hydration problem though, it doesn't require magically serializing the running state like java Serializable wants to. It just needs a way to produce minimal inputs to then reconstitute the state again on the other side.