classpath-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[cp-patches] FYI: Serialization Patch: fix support for private readResol


From: Jeroen Frijters
Subject: [cp-patches] FYI: Serialization Patch: fix support for private readResolve and writeReplace methods
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 11:43:00 +0200

Hi again,

I applied the attached patch to fix the problem.

Regards,
Jeroen

2005-07-07  Jeroen Frijters  <address@hidden>

        * java/io/ObjectStreamClass.java
        (findAccessibleMethod): Added code to make method accessible.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeroen Frijters 
> Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 11:03
> To: 'Daniel Bonniot'; address@hidden
> Subject: RE: [cp-patches] Re: Serialization: readResolve and 
> writeReplace inparent class
> 
> Hi Daniel,
> 
> Your patch broke the Mauve 
> gnu.testlet.java.io.Serializable.readResolve test. If the 
> readResolve method is in the current class and it is private 
> it is no longer found.
> 
> Regards,
> Jeroen
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: address@hidden 
> > [mailto:address@hidden 
> > On Behalf Of Daniel Bonniot
> > Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 19:32
> > To: address@hidden
> > Subject: [cp-patches] Re: Serialization: readResolve and 
> > writeReplace inparent class
> > 
> > > This seems like it must be duplicated somewhere, but I 
> couldn't find
> > > it quickly.
> > 
> > I also looked but could not find code to reuse.
> > 
> > > There is getPackagePortion in Class, maybe making that
> > > package-private and then using it would be good.
> > 
> > We're in java.io...
> > 
> > I wouldn't mind adding a utility method somewhere if I'm 
> > pointed to the right 
> > place. On irc, Tom seemed to think it's trivial enough to 
> not bother.
> > 
> > > GNU style is to put line breaks before operators, not after them.
> > 
> > OK, fixed, I reattach the patch.
> > 
> > > I wonder if there is a strange case here where someone adds 
> > a private
> > > method to the class hierarchy "later" (after all the other 
> > classes are
> > > compiled).  Should the private method hide the superclass 
> methods of
> > > the same signature?  Perhaps this is an incompatible 
> > change, offhand I
> > > forget.
> > 
> > I don't know the answer. If somebody can come up with a 
> mauve test...
> > 
> > In the mean time, my patch improves on the current behavior.
> > 
> > Daniel
> > 
> 

Attachment: osc.patch.txt
Description: osc.patch.txt


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]