Mailing-List: contact river-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of greggwon@gmail.com designates
 74.125.82.175 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:mime-version:subject:date
         :references;
        b=Fe1TjLehzdnaSpwRqfr2W8ZAQXcYHxthrfEFIpawNFA+kNr+8gG/lgEzXR8ZY/Ib0X
         Pz8dIRLi4nppdVC1Ekf9ct9JwoehoZPq13eC7YvdwzW5KXlwF3VfzgW/UoioDXAHnKjP
         JYMQOfwJs27/HfC4T0MV6N1VOfREReFVC7fZs=
Message-Id: <07FA1E55-4FE4-4026-B5B9-33210387BD12@gmail.com>
From: Gregg Wonderly <greggwon@gmail.com>
To: "river-dev@incubator.apache.org" <river-dev@incubator.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: 
 <B1CF6B3997B0D4499EF6043F5388D6B805B48605@TEW-MAIL.global.avidww.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 7B367)
Subject: Re: Tricky question - UnmarshalException Serialized Form.
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:25:34 -0500
References: <4BD8F9E5.1010307@zeus.net.au> <4BD95BE7.1060402@zeus.net.au>
 <w2lc5dcc791004290329zb35d61c3od0d1041dee92f2a2@mail.gmail.com>
 <4BD962E3.8070701@zeus.net.au> <4BD9DDD3.20209@wonderly.org>
 <4BDA8522.1090703@zeus.net.au>
 <B1CF6B3997B0D4499EF6043F5388D6B805B48605@TEW-MAIL.global.avidww.com>

SQL exceptions from some DBs seem to include meta data in the creation =
of the subclass object which is not serializable.  Unfortunately, =
serializable is still not built into the language spec so that compilers =
have to traverse the class members to make sure they live up to the =
contract.

Gregg=20

Sent from my iPad

On Apr 30, 2010, at 8:56 AM, "Christopher Dolan" =
<christopher.dolan@avid.com> wrote:

> I'm intrigued and confused.  Throwable is Serializable so how is it
> possible to make a subclass not serializable?
> Chris
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Firmstone [mailto:jini@zeus.net.au]=20
> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 2:22 AM
> To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Tricky question - UnmarshalException Serialized Form.
>=20
> Thanks Gregg,
>=20
> I'm thinking about making all the new Exception classes non =
serializable
>=20
> to eliminate any codebase downloads for older jini version clients,=20
> thanks for the soln.
>=20
> That way only RemoteExceptions need be Serialized.
>=20
> Cheers,
>=20
> Peter.
>=20
> Gregg Wonderly wrote:
>> Peter Firmstone wrote:
>>> No mate, that sounds cool, it would be nice to send stack traces=20
>>> remotely with nested exceptions too if possible anyone got any=20
>>> experiences or suggestions?
>>=20
>> ex.printStackTrace( new PrintWriter( new StringWriter() ) );
>>=20
>> This works for me where I have does this to make sure that I don't=20
>> have to worry about SQLExceptions and the like not being =
serializable.
>>=20
>> Gregg Wonderly
>>=20
>>=20
>=20