Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Collections.unmodifiable* should be Serializable? #3071

Open
dankurka opened this issue Jun 10, 2015 · 17 comments
Open

Collections.unmodifiable* should be Serializable? #3071

dankurka opened this issue Jun 10, 2015 · 17 comments

Comments

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor

Originally reported on Google Code with ID 3065

Found in GWT Release:  1.5

Detailed description:

Some people might like to serialize unmodifiable collections.


Reported by scottb+legacy@google.com on 2008-10-31 00:53:09

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

I don't think this should be an enchancement, rather a bug, as the javadoc
http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Collections.html#unmodifiableList%28java.util.List%29
clearily states that: The returned (*) will be serializable if the specified (*) is
serializable.

Any plans on implemeting it soon? Adding a "implements Serializable" in JRE emulation
code shouldn't be that much work.

Reported by bochenski.jakub on 2010-03-03 13:59:09

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Dan, is this actually fixed now, or is this separate?

Reported by scottb@google.com on 2010-03-03 17:14:50

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

It's separate.  I'll take a look at making this change.

Reported by rice@google.com on 2010-03-03 18:10:36

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Is this "enhancement" will be available in the next gwt release ?

Reported by cyril.lakech on 2010-05-04 12:56:49

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Fix committed as r8394.  The fix also includes support for serializing a SingletonMap.

Reported by rice@google.com on 2010-07-20 17:47:04

  • Status changed: FixedNotReleased

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have a project that this issue is causing problems with.  Is there a way to pull in
the fixed version with a snapshot or emulation overlay?

Reported by argumsoft on 2010-09-19 04:09:15

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

This has been marked FixedNotReleased for close to 6 months.  There have been some GWT
releases since July 2010.  Was it not included?  I'd like to use unmodifiable collections.

Reported by crehbein on 2011-01-05 15:29:10

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Since may 2010, I am waiting for an answer to understand why a fixed bug is not released
yet.

Please let me kown

Reported by cyril.lakech on 2011-01-05 15:40:39

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

This change caused a large code size increase, and was put aside.  We can take another
look at this.

Reported by rice@google.com on 2011-01-05 15:55:12

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

OK thank you very much for your answer

Can someone provide a workaround? Maybe we can override the Collections class easily?

Reported by cyril.lakech on 2011-01-05 15:59:01

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Reported by rjrjr@google.com on 2011-01-13 03:11:50

  • Labels added: Type-Feature
  • Labels removed: Type-Enhancement

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Reported by mrrussell@google.com on 2011-06-17 14:33:33

  • Status changed: Fixed

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

This bug is marked fixed but I still get the below error with GWT 2.4:

    com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.SerializationException: Type 'java.util.Collections$UnmodifiableRandomAccessList'
was not included in the set of types which can be serialized by this SerializationPolicy
or its Class object could not be loaded. For security purposes, this type will not
be serialized.

In GWT 2.5 RC 1 I also noticed the `com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.core.java.util.Collections`
class doesn't have the code from r8394

Reported by bradcupit on 2012-06-28 21:55:43

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

r8394 was actually rolled back in r8409

Reported by t.broyer on 2012-06-29 07:36:15

  • Status changed: Accepted

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for the update Thomas

Reported by bradcupit on 2012-06-29 12:59:39

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Issue 3333 has been merged into this issue.

Reported by t.broyer on 2012-08-28 08:54:49

@dankurka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Can this be fixed?

Reported by nfm@google.com on 2014-11-18 10:17:00

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant