[Biojava-l] persistence - and the problems with it
Thu, 4 May 2000 09:14:06 +1200 (NZST)
On Wed, 3 May 2000, Thomas Down wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 03:45:37PM +0100, Simon Brocklehurst wrote:
> > >
> > > 1) Java Serialisation is a very bad way of making objects persistent.
> > Agreed! There are just sooooooo many bad things about Java serialization...
> Agreed up to a point. It's certainly no panacea, but, to be fair,
> it works pretty well for a lot of cases where you want short-term
> persistance for data from simple programs. (Hey, it's got me out
> of trouble plenty of times...). I'd like to see everything in
> Java that /can/ reasonably be serialized marked as Serializable
> (for a start, that allows distributed biojava apps using RMI).
I may have this completely wrong but isn't serialization important for
piping objects between threads. (To be honest i've never tried piping an
object not marked as serializable). If this is the case however it would
be a good idea to mark anything that is likely to be thrown around by
threads as serializable.
Just my $NZ 0.02 (thats about $US 0.01).
> Biojava-l mailing list - Biojavaemail@example.com
Mark Schreiber Ph: 64 3 4797875
Rm 218 email firstname.lastname@example.org
Department of Biochemistry email email@example.com
University of Otago
PO Box 56