Mailing-List: contact dev-help@zest.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@zest.apache.org
Received-SPF: error (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <55781011.9060302@nosphere.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:23:13 +0200
From: Paul Merlin <paul@nosphere.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 3.0.11 (Macintosh/20140602)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@zest.apache.org
Subject: Re: Drop Prototype in ValueBuilder in 3.0??
References: 
 <CADmm+Kdb7auCj0MJo_nfmVYWQ0K=JG6hzJ+DynWem6upURy1UA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADmm+KcrJ-HHOkrBaTiWEQsKtQCfZH29pUUYNRFHNB5Xi=7rQQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CADmm+KcrJ-HHOkrBaTiWEQsKtQCfZH29pUUYNRFHNB5Xi=7rQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Niclas Hedhman a =C3=A9crit :
> Follow up on this;
>
> I have now removed the Serialization code in the ValueBuilder prototype
> handling, and doing a shallow clone instead.
>
> IMPORTANT: This means that all properties of a ValueComposite MUST BE
> IMMUTABLE.
Seems more than legit.

> In reality, this has always been implied, for instance Collections clas=
ses
> in Properties are wrapped in Collections.unmodifiableXyz() calls and
> Property can have ValueComposites, but regular objects are high
> discouraged, although might still be supported. In 3.0, I want to remov=
e
> the possibility to put POJO into Property<?> of ValueComposites and nar=
row
> down the exact types to support (which will all can be ensured to be
> Immutable).
>
> This works for me, and I have merged these and a bunch of other changes
> into 'develop' branch, for every to take a look.
Made a quick review and all changes looks good to me.

Cheers

/Paul